Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

So, it begins – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,212
edited September 29 in General
imageSo, it begins – politicalbetting.com

NEWKemi Badenoch called for rich pensioners to lose their winter fuel payments during her 2022 Tory leadership launch.Newly resurfaced clip shows she argued for means-testing. Notable given she’s criticised Labour for scrapping payments for all. https://t.co/CAbJclCBzJ

Read the full story here

«1345

Comments

  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,895
    Early.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,236
    edited September 4
    FPT

    HYUFD said:

    'Kemi Badenoch called for rich pensioners to lose their winter fuel payments during her 2022 Tory leadership launch.

    Newly resurfaced clip shows she argued for means-testing. Notable given she’s criticised Labour for scrapping payments for all.'
    https://x.com/benrileysmith/status/1831079967586931063

    That seems to me to be a coherent position. And also one I agree with. Scrapping for all except those on benefits seems to me too extreme. But a proper system of means testing with a reasonable cut off does seem appropriate. It is something I would apply to all benefits including the 'middle class' ones like Child Benefit.
    I would scrap Winter Fuel Payment entirely on grounds of efficiency and if necessary adjust Pension Credit, which is the means by which older people with inadequate pensions get topped up. You might decide other poorer people, not just the old, struggle with fuel bills and adjust Universal Credit. This might not save any money compared with the status quo but it has the benefit of being a lot more equitable.

    In short Winter Fuel Payment is an indefensible benefit in its previous form and Reeves, Starmer and previously Badenoch were correct in wanting to change it. Perhaps they didn't handle the politics particularly well but they are right on the principle.

    ,.............

    And add, Badenoch is disingenuous in her claims that her means testing is different from Labour's means testing. Of course her attacks on Starmer and Reeves are entirely hypocritical and she's been found out.
  • I suspect the key question is whether this is a story researched by the Telegraph's own hacks, or from the "dealing with the opposition" department of one of the other campaigns.

    In other news, The Times have a leaked recording of Robert Jenrick saying that immigration is bad for Birmingham;

    https://www.thetimes.com/article/57dcef2e-2647-4798-815f-f0985157d838?shareToken=52c7f1b3aef0795f3a50ef6ff846ca03

    Though that may have been leaked by Jenrick, of course.
  • Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 3,944

    I've always understood the winter fuel allowance as one of Gordon Brown's most obviously political bungs. If the state pension isn't high enough for recipients to heat their homes in winter then the remedy is to increase the state pension, not pay a random extra allowance. Means-testing it simply adds a layer of pointless bureaucracy onto something that shouldn't exist.

    Also, if any of the many home insulation schemes run by various governments over the last couple of decades had been any good, everyone's house would now be so well insulated it wouldn't cost that much to keep warm over the winter.

    Edit: I was arguing yesterday that one of the benefits for a new Tory leader essentially conceding the next election is that it would free them from the concern of political positioning over things like the winter fuel allowance, and they could actually try and convince people how ridiculous it was.

    My wife is older than me above pension age, and she did get the wfa every year. Not sure I am that upset at it going anyway as I never saw any of it when I paid the winter bills.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,173

    I've always understood the winter fuel allowance as one of Gordon Brown's most obviously political bungs. If the state pension isn't high enough for recipients to heat their homes in winter then the remedy is to increase the state pension, not pay a random extra allowance. Means-testing it simply adds a layer of pointless bureaucracy onto something that shouldn't exist.

    Also, if any of the many home insulation schemes run by various governments over the last couple of decades had been any good, everyone's house would now be so well insulated it wouldn't cost that much to keep warm over the winter.

    Edit: I was arguing yesterday that one of the benefits for a new Tory leader essentially conceding the next election is that it would free them from the concern of political positioning over things like the winter fuel allowance, and they could actually try and convince people how ridiculous it was.

    Instead we have one of them hypocritically flip flopping to defend it.
    The idea that opposition might free politicians from political positioning is ... idealistic.
  • I've always understood the winter fuel allowance as one of Gordon Brown's most obviously political bungs. If the state pension isn't high enough for recipients to heat their homes in winter then the remedy is to increase the state pension, not pay a random extra allowance. Means-testing it simply adds a layer of pointless bureaucracy onto something that shouldn't exist.

    Also, if any of the many home insulation schemes run by various governments over the last couple of decades had been any good, everyone's house would now be so well insulated it wouldn't cost that much to keep warm over the winter.

    Edit: I was arguing yesterday that one of the benefits for a new Tory leader essentially conceding the next election is that it would free them from the concern of political positioning over things like the winter fuel allowance, and they could actually try and convince people how ridiculous it was.

    The politics of a £300 payment for heating looks more virtuous than £6 a week on the basic pension. I get that, but yes it's terrible government, creating complexity where simplicity is better.

    Story on the Beeb news this morning that the Triple Lock is pointing towards an inflation + £400 increase in the basic pension for April 2025.
  • Wait until Tucker and this 'historian' hear about the other guy.

    Liberals and conservatives alike have turned on Tucker Carlson after controversial podcaster and self-proclaimed historian Darryl Cooper claimed on Carlson’s show that “millions of people ended up dead” in Nazi concentration camps.

    Cooper also painted U.K. prime minister Winston Churchill as the “chief villain” of World War II.

    Carlson said on X that Cooper “may be the best and most honest popular historian in the United States” when posting The Tucker Carlson Show Monday episode, which featured topics like Christianity and authoritarians like Viktor Orbán and Vladimir Putin.


    https://www.thedailybeast.com/tucker-carlson-slammed-after-hosting-nazi-apologist-on-podcast
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,173
    Well, hello North Carolina. We have a voter reg update. In week 15 this year (July 21st), the total number of registrants was almost 50% higher than it was during the same week in 2020 (17,178 to 12,426).
    https://x.com/tbonier/status/1831139736477430080

    Interesting, particularly as Biden didn't announce he was stepping down until the 21st.

    The margin in 2020 was less than 75k votes.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,236
    FF43 said:

    FPT

    HYUFD said:

    'Kemi Badenoch called for rich pensioners to lose their winter fuel payments during her 2022 Tory leadership launch.

    Newly resurfaced clip shows she argued for means-testing. Notable given she’s criticised Labour for scrapping payments for all.'
    https://x.com/benrileysmith/status/1831079967586931063

    That seems to me to be a coherent position. And also one I agree with. Scrapping for all except those on benefits seems to me too extreme. But a proper system of means testing with a reasonable cut off does seem appropriate. It is something I would apply to all benefits including the 'middle class' ones like Child Benefit.
    I would scrap Winter Fuel Payment entirely on grounds of efficiency and if necessary adjust Pension Credit, which is the means by which older people with inadequate pensions get topped up. You might decide other poorer people, not just the old, struggle with fuel bills and adjust Universal Credit. This might not save any money compared with the status quo but it has the benefit of being a lot more equitable.

    In short Winter Fuel Payment is an indefensible benefit in its previous form and Reeves, Starmer and previously Badenoch were correct in wanting to change it. Perhaps they didn't handle the politics particularly well but they are right on the principle.

    ,.............

    And add, Badenoch is disingenuous in her claims that her means testing is different from Labour's means testing. Of course her attacks on Starmer and Reeves are entirely hypocritical and she's been found out.
    And further add, reading her original quote it's clear she was proposing abolishing WFP entirely. The bit about payments for those that need it is justification after she was caught out.
  • FF43 said:

    FPT

    HYUFD said:

    'Kemi Badenoch called for rich pensioners to lose their winter fuel payments during her 2022 Tory leadership launch.

    Newly resurfaced clip shows she argued for means-testing. Notable given she’s criticised Labour for scrapping payments for all.'
    https://x.com/benrileysmith/status/1831079967586931063

    That seems to me to be a coherent position. And also one I agree with. Scrapping for all except those on benefits seems to me too extreme. But a proper system of means testing with a reasonable cut off does seem appropriate. It is something I would apply to all benefits including the 'middle class' ones like Child Benefit.
    I would scrap Winter Fuel Payment entirely on grounds of efficiency and if necessary adjust Pension Credit, which is the means by which older people with inadequate pensions get topped up. You might decide other poorer people, not just the old, struggle with fuel bills and adjust Universal Credit. This might not save any money compared with the status quo but it has the benefit of being a lot more equitable.

    In short Winter Fuel Payment is an indefensible benefit in its previous form and Reeves, Starmer and previously Badenoch were correct in wanting to change it. Perhaps they didn't handle the politics particularly well but they are right on the principle.

    ,.............

    And add, Badenoch is disingenuous in her claims that her means testing is different from Labour's means testing. Of course her attacks on Starmer and Reeves are entirely hypocritical and she's been found out.
    Not at all. She has suggested a proper system of means testing not just defaulting to the current unsuitable benefits threshhold. As I said on the previous page it is a coherent position and attacks like yours seem to be predicated on the simple pont that you don't like Badenoch rather than any proper examination of what she is saying. Your original comment copied from the previous thread is sensible. The random attack on Badenoch you have tacked on here is not.
  • Wait until Tucker and this 'historian' hear about the other guy.

    Liberals and conservatives alike have turned on Tucker Carlson after controversial podcaster and self-proclaimed historian Darryl Cooper claimed on Carlson’s show that “millions of people ended up dead” in Nazi concentration camps.

    Cooper also painted U.K. prime minister Winston Churchill as the “chief villain” of World War II.

    Carlson said on X that Cooper “may be the best and most honest popular historian in the United States” when posting The Tucker Carlson Show Monday episode, which featured topics like Christianity and authoritarians like Viktor Orbán and Vladimir Putin.


    https://www.thedailybeast.com/tucker-carlson-slammed-after-hosting-nazi-apologist-on-podcast

    Some Yank historian called Darryl Cooper reckons "Winston Churchill is the chief villain of World War 2".

    He's going to shit his fucking pants when he reads up about the other guy.


    https://x.com/thesundaysport/status/1831223073611104393
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,082

    Wait until Tucker and this 'historian' hear about the other guy.

    Liberals and conservatives alike have turned on Tucker Carlson after controversial podcaster and self-proclaimed historian Darryl Cooper claimed on Carlson’s show that “millions of people ended up dead” in Nazi concentration camps.

    Cooper also painted U.K. prime minister Winston Churchill as the “chief villain” of World War II.

    Carlson said on X that Cooper “may be the best and most honest popular historian in the United States” when posting The Tucker Carlson Show Monday episode, which featured topics like Christianity and authoritarians like Viktor Orbán and Vladimir Putin.


    https://www.thedailybeast.com/tucker-carlson-slammed-after-hosting-nazi-apologist-on-podcast

    Some Yank historian called Darryl Cooper reckons "Winston Churchill is the chief villain of World War 2".

    He's going to shit his fucking pants when he reads up about the other guy.


    https://x.com/thesundaysport/status/1831223073611104393
    Would you please stop mis-spelling Fucker Carlson’s name?

    It bad enough when people call Twatter by other names…
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 36,099

    Wait until Tucker and this 'historian' hear about the other guy.

    Liberals and conservatives alike have turned on Tucker Carlson after controversial podcaster and self-proclaimed historian Darryl Cooper claimed on Carlson’s show that “millions of people ended up dead” in Nazi concentration camps.

    Cooper also painted U.K. prime minister Winston Churchill as the “chief villain” of World War II.

    Carlson said on X that Cooper “may be the best and most honest popular historian in the United States” when posting The Tucker Carlson Show Monday episode, which featured topics like Christianity and authoritarians like Viktor Orbán and Vladimir Putin.


    https://www.thedailybeast.com/tucker-carlson-slammed-after-hosting-nazi-apologist-on-podcast

    Some Yank historian called Darryl Cooper reckons "Winston Churchill is the chief villain of World War 2".

    He's going to shit his fucking pants when he reads up about the other guy.


    https://x.com/thesundaysport/status/1831223073611104393
    Nope. He's a Hitler stan apparently

    https://x.com/yashar/status/1831129276026134572
  • Scott_xP said:

    Wait until Tucker and this 'historian' hear about the other guy.

    Liberals and conservatives alike have turned on Tucker Carlson after controversial podcaster and self-proclaimed historian Darryl Cooper claimed on Carlson’s show that “millions of people ended up dead” in Nazi concentration camps.

    Cooper also painted U.K. prime minister Winston Churchill as the “chief villain” of World War II.

    Carlson said on X that Cooper “may be the best and most honest popular historian in the United States” when posting The Tucker Carlson Show Monday episode, which featured topics like Christianity and authoritarians like Viktor Orbán and Vladimir Putin.


    https://www.thedailybeast.com/tucker-carlson-slammed-after-hosting-nazi-apologist-on-podcast

    Some Yank historian called Darryl Cooper reckons "Winston Churchill is the chief villain of World War 2".

    He's going to shit his fucking pants when he reads up about the other guy.


    https://x.com/thesundaysport/status/1831223073611104393
    Nope. He's a Hitler stan apparently

    https://x.com/yashar/status/1831129276026134572
    A Hitler fan on Fucker Carlson's show?

    No, I refuse to believe that.
  • eekeek Posts: 28,585
    FF43 said:

    FPT

    HYUFD said:

    'Kemi Badenoch called for rich pensioners to lose their winter fuel payments during her 2022 Tory leadership launch.

    Newly resurfaced clip shows she argued for means-testing. Notable given she’s criticised Labour for scrapping payments for all.'
    https://x.com/benrileysmith/status/1831079967586931063

    That seems to me to be a coherent position. And also one I agree with. Scrapping for all except those on benefits seems to me too extreme. But a proper system of means testing with a reasonable cut off does seem appropriate. It is something I would apply to all benefits including the 'middle class' ones like Child Benefit.
    I would scrap Winter Fuel Payment entirely on grounds of efficiency and if necessary adjust Pension Credit, which is the means by which older people with inadequate pensions get topped up. You might decide other poorer people, not just the old, struggle with fuel bills and adjust Universal Credit. This might not save any money compared with the status quo but it has the benefit of being a lot more equitable.

    In short Winter Fuel Payment is an indefensible benefit in its previous form and Reeves, Starmer and previously Badenoch were correct in wanting to change it. Perhaps they didn't handle the politics particularly well but they are right on the principle.

    ,.............

    And add, Badenoch is disingenuous in her claims that her means testing is different from Labour's means testing. Of course her attacks on Starmer and Reeves are entirely hypocritical and she's been found out.
    There is a certain amount of logic in providing the money as an obvious one off payment at a point where the money could be paid directly to your energy company. By just increasing the rate by £6 a week that benefit would be lost and the money received in the summer lost before expensive fuel bills arrived.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,173
    Evolution isn't just about the genes, part 2

    Noncanonical inheritance of phenotypic information by protein amyloids
    https://www.nature.com/articles/s41556-024-01494-9
    All known heritable phenotypic information in animals is transmitted by direct inheritance of nucleic acids, their covalent modifications or histone modifications that modulate expression of associated genomic regions. Nonetheless, numerous familial traits and disorders cannot be attributed to known heritable molecular factors. Here we identify amyloid-like protein structures that are stably inherited in wild-type animals and influence traits. Their perturbation by genetic, environmental or pharmacological treatments leads to developmental phenotypes that can be epigenetically passed onto progeny. Injection of amyloids isolated from different phenotypic backgrounds into naive animals recapitulates the associated phenotype in offspring. Genetic and proteomic analyses reveal that the 26S proteasome and its conserved regulators maintain heritable amyloids across generations, which enables proper germ cell sex differentiation. We propose that inheritance of a proteinaceous epigenetic memory coordinates developmental timing and patterning with the environment to confer adaptive fitness...
  • FF43 said:

    FPT

    HYUFD said:

    'Kemi Badenoch called for rich pensioners to lose their winter fuel payments during her 2022 Tory leadership launch.

    Newly resurfaced clip shows she argued for means-testing. Notable given she’s criticised Labour for scrapping payments for all.'
    https://x.com/benrileysmith/status/1831079967586931063

    That seems to me to be a coherent position. And also one I agree with. Scrapping for all except those on benefits seems to me too extreme. But a proper system of means testing with a reasonable cut off does seem appropriate. It is something I would apply to all benefits including the 'middle class' ones like Child Benefit.
    I would scrap Winter Fuel Payment entirely on grounds of efficiency and if necessary adjust Pension Credit, which is the means by which older people with inadequate pensions get topped up. You might decide other poorer people, not just the old, struggle with fuel bills and adjust Universal Credit. This might not save any money compared with the status quo but it has the benefit of being a lot more equitable.

    In short Winter Fuel Payment is an indefensible benefit in its previous form and Reeves, Starmer and previously Badenoch were correct in wanting to change it. Perhaps they didn't handle the politics particularly well but they are right on the principle.

    ,.............

    And add, Badenoch is disingenuous in her claims that her means testing is different from Labour's means testing. Of course her attacks on Starmer and Reeves are entirely hypocritical and she's been found out.
    Not at all. She has suggested a proper system of means testing not just defaulting to the current unsuitable benefits threshhold. As I said on the previous page it is a coherent position and attacks like yours seem to be predicated on the simple pont that you don't like Badenoch rather than any proper examination of what she is saying. Your original comment copied from the previous thread is sensible. The random attack on Badenoch you have tacked on here is not.
    Isn't the problem then that a separate means test creates another layer of bureaucracy, swallowing up a decent slice of the savings?

    I guess the other question is where KB would draw the line. Wherever it goes, some people will be the wrong side of the cutoff.
  • kamskikamski Posts: 5,208

    Wait until Tucker and this 'historian' hear about the other guy.

    Liberals and conservatives alike have turned on Tucker Carlson after controversial podcaster and self-proclaimed historian Darryl Cooper claimed on Carlson’s show that “millions of people ended up dead” in Nazi concentration camps.

    Cooper also painted U.K. prime minister Winston Churchill as the “chief villain” of World War II.

    Carlson said on X that Cooper “may be the best and most honest popular historian in the United States” when posting The Tucker Carlson Show Monday episode, which featured topics like Christianity and authoritarians like Viktor Orbán and Vladimir Putin.


    https://www.thedailybeast.com/tucker-carlson-slammed-after-hosting-nazi-apologist-on-podcast

    Some Yank historian called Darryl Cooper reckons "Winston Churchill is the chief villain of World War 2".

    He's going to shit his fucking pants when he reads up about the other guy.


    https://x.com/thesundaysport/status/1831223073611104393
    A maverick historian no doubt.

    “Very interesting. Worth watching,” wrote fellow maverick Elon Musk. https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1830856758505402374

    Ah those fun-loving mavericks
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 49,112

    Scott_xP said:

    Wait until Tucker and this 'historian' hear about the other guy.

    Liberals and conservatives alike have turned on Tucker Carlson after controversial podcaster and self-proclaimed historian Darryl Cooper claimed on Carlson’s show that “millions of people ended up dead” in Nazi concentration camps.

    Cooper also painted U.K. prime minister Winston Churchill as the “chief villain” of World War II.

    Carlson said on X that Cooper “may be the best and most honest popular historian in the United States” when posting The Tucker Carlson Show Monday episode, which featured topics like Christianity and authoritarians like Viktor Orbán and Vladimir Putin.


    https://www.thedailybeast.com/tucker-carlson-slammed-after-hosting-nazi-apologist-on-podcast

    Some Yank historian called Darryl Cooper reckons "Winston Churchill is the chief villain of World War 2".

    He's going to shit his fucking pants when he reads up about the other guy.


    https://x.com/thesundaysport/status/1831223073611104393
    Nope. He's a Hitler stan apparently

    https://x.com/yashar/status/1831129276026134572
    A Hitler fan on Fucker Carlson's show?

    No, I refuse to believe that.
    I expect he is.

    I can see a case of depicting Winston Churchill as villain from the American isolationist perspective. It hinges on what date you consider the start of WW2:

    1937 for China and Japan
    1939 for Britain, Germany, France, Italy
    1941 for Russia and the USA

    Churchill made great efforts to involve America in the European War, and in pushing for a Germany first policy, rather than a Pacific war against Japan.

    The argument rather falls down as it was Hitler that declared war on the USA, not vice versa.
  • kamskikamski Posts: 5,208
    Nigelb said:

    Well, hello North Carolina. We have a voter reg update. In week 15 this year (July 21st), the total number of registrants was almost 50% higher than it was during the same week in 2020 (17,178 to 12,426).
    https://x.com/tbonier/status/1831139736477430080

    Interesting, particularly as Biden didn't announce he was stepping down until the 21st.

    The margin in 2020 was less than 75k votes.

    So this was the week after the Trump shooting?
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,668
    Foxy said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Wait until Tucker and this 'historian' hear about the other guy.

    Liberals and conservatives alike have turned on Tucker Carlson after controversial podcaster and self-proclaimed historian Darryl Cooper claimed on Carlson’s show that “millions of people ended up dead” in Nazi concentration camps.

    Cooper also painted U.K. prime minister Winston Churchill as the “chief villain” of World War II.

    Carlson said on X that Cooper “may be the best and most honest popular historian in the United States” when posting The Tucker Carlson Show Monday episode, which featured topics like Christianity and authoritarians like Viktor Orbán and Vladimir Putin.


    https://www.thedailybeast.com/tucker-carlson-slammed-after-hosting-nazi-apologist-on-podcast

    Some Yank historian called Darryl Cooper reckons "Winston Churchill is the chief villain of World War 2".

    He's going to shit his fucking pants when he reads up about the other guy.


    https://x.com/thesundaysport/status/1831223073611104393
    Nope. He's a Hitler stan apparently

    https://x.com/yashar/status/1831129276026134572
    A Hitler fan on Fucker Carlson's show?

    No, I refuse to believe that.
    I expect he is.

    I can see a case of depicting Winston Churchill as villain from the American isolationist perspective. It hinges on what date you consider the start of WW2:

    1937 for China and Japan
    1939 for Britain, Germany, France, Italy
    1941 for Russia and the USA

    Churchill made great efforts to involve America in the European War, and in pushing for a Germany first policy, rather than a Pacific war against Japan.

    The argument rather falls down as it was Hitler that declared war on the USA, not vice versa.
    Germany was the most dangerous enemy, so that made sense even if it was Japan that actually hit America first.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,141
    kamski said:

    Wait until Tucker and this 'historian' hear about the other guy.

    Liberals and conservatives alike have turned on Tucker Carlson after controversial podcaster and self-proclaimed historian Darryl Cooper claimed on Carlson’s show that “millions of people ended up dead” in Nazi concentration camps.

    Cooper also painted U.K. prime minister Winston Churchill as the “chief villain” of World War II.

    Carlson said on X that Cooper “may be the best and most honest popular historian in the United States” when posting The Tucker Carlson Show Monday episode, which featured topics like Christianity and authoritarians like Viktor Orbán and Vladimir Putin.


    https://www.thedailybeast.com/tucker-carlson-slammed-after-hosting-nazi-apologist-on-podcast

    Some Yank historian called Darryl Cooper reckons "Winston Churchill is the chief villain of World War 2".

    He's going to shit his fucking pants when he reads up about the other guy.


    https://x.com/thesundaysport/status/1831223073611104393
    A maverick historian no doubt.

    “Very interesting. Worth watching,” wrote fellow maverick Elon Musk. https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1830856758505402374

    Ah those fun-loving mavericks
    High status males is I believe the correct term.
    It's unfortunate most of them seem to have the emotional development of a 14 year old.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 36,099
    @elonmusk

    A Trump victory is essential to defense of freedom of speech, secure borders, safe cities and sensible spending!

    @SethAbramson

    (📣) The President of Brazil has issued a statement about Twitter:

    “The world isn’t obliged to put up with Elon Musk’s far-right free-for-all just because he is rich.”

    https://x.com/SethAbramson/status/1831169253426262228
  • eekeek Posts: 28,585

    FF43 said:

    FPT

    HYUFD said:

    'Kemi Badenoch called for rich pensioners to lose their winter fuel payments during her 2022 Tory leadership launch.

    Newly resurfaced clip shows she argued for means-testing. Notable given she’s criticised Labour for scrapping payments for all.'
    https://x.com/benrileysmith/status/1831079967586931063

    That seems to me to be a coherent position. And also one I agree with. Scrapping for all except those on benefits seems to me too extreme. But a proper system of means testing with a reasonable cut off does seem appropriate. It is something I would apply to all benefits including the 'middle class' ones like Child Benefit.
    I would scrap Winter Fuel Payment entirely on grounds of efficiency and if necessary adjust Pension Credit, which is the means by which older people with inadequate pensions get topped up. You might decide other poorer people, not just the old, struggle with fuel bills and adjust Universal Credit. This might not save any money compared with the status quo but it has the benefit of being a lot more equitable.

    In short Winter Fuel Payment is an indefensible benefit in its previous form and Reeves, Starmer and previously Badenoch were correct in wanting to change it. Perhaps they didn't handle the politics particularly well but they are right on the principle.

    ,.............

    And add, Badenoch is disingenuous in her claims that her means testing is different from Labour's means testing. Of course her attacks on Starmer and Reeves are entirely hypocritical and she's been found out.
    Not at all. She has suggested a proper system of means testing not just defaulting to the current unsuitable benefits threshhold. As I said on the previous page it is a coherent position and attacks like yours seem to be predicated on the simple pont that you don't like Badenoch rather than any proper examination of what she is saying. Your original comment copied from the previous thread is sensible. The random attack on Badenoch you have tacked on here is not.
    Isn't the problem then that a separate means test creates another layer of bureaucracy, swallowing up a decent slice of the savings?

    I guess the other question is where KB would draw the line. Wherever it goes, some people will be the wrong side of the cutoff.
    The easiest fix would be to claw it back by some means or other while paying it to everyone.

    But clawing it back via income tax (as is done with universal) would result in both pensioners being taxed so there really is no easy fix here - I think you end up with something like Martin Lewis suggested using council tax bands to pay it (and equally that would require combining 2 data sources to do so)
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,515
    eek said:

    FF43 said:

    FPT

    HYUFD said:

    'Kemi Badenoch called for rich pensioners to lose their winter fuel payments during her 2022 Tory leadership launch.

    Newly resurfaced clip shows she argued for means-testing. Notable given she’s criticised Labour for scrapping payments for all.'
    https://x.com/benrileysmith/status/1831079967586931063

    That seems to me to be a coherent position. And also one I agree with. Scrapping for all except those on benefits seems to me too extreme. But a proper system of means testing with a reasonable cut off does seem appropriate. It is something I would apply to all benefits including the 'middle class' ones like Child Benefit.
    I would scrap Winter Fuel Payment entirely on grounds of efficiency and if necessary adjust Pension Credit, which is the means by which older people with inadequate pensions get topped up. You might decide other poorer people, not just the old, struggle with fuel bills and adjust Universal Credit. This might not save any money compared with the status quo but it has the benefit of being a lot more equitable.

    In short Winter Fuel Payment is an indefensible benefit in its previous form and Reeves, Starmer and previously Badenoch were correct in wanting to change it. Perhaps they didn't handle the politics particularly well but they are right on the principle.

    ,.............

    And add, Badenoch is disingenuous in her claims that her means testing is different from Labour's means testing. Of course her attacks on Starmer and Reeves are entirely hypocritical and she's been found out.
    Not at all. She has suggested a proper system of means testing not just defaulting to the current unsuitable benefits threshhold. As I said on the previous page it is a coherent position and attacks like yours seem to be predicated on the simple pont that you don't like Badenoch rather than any proper examination of what she is saying. Your original comment copied from the previous thread is sensible. The random attack on Badenoch you have tacked on here is not.
    Isn't the problem then that a separate means test creates another layer of bureaucracy, swallowing up a decent slice of the savings?

    I guess the other question is where KB would draw the line. Wherever it goes, some people will be the wrong side of the cutoff.
    The easiest fix would be to claw it back by some means or other while paying it to everyone.

    But clawing it back via income tax (as is done with universal) would result in both pensioners being taxed so there really is no easy fix here - I think you end up with something like Martin Lewis suggested using council tax bands to pay it (and equally that would require combining 2 data sources to do so)
    Set the state pension rate at the rate of the tax-free allowance. Raise them both together. Any additional income is taxed. Problem solved.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 49,112

    Foxy said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Wait until Tucker and this 'historian' hear about the other guy.

    Liberals and conservatives alike have turned on Tucker Carlson after controversial podcaster and self-proclaimed historian Darryl Cooper claimed on Carlson’s show that “millions of people ended up dead” in Nazi concentration camps.

    Cooper also painted U.K. prime minister Winston Churchill as the “chief villain” of World War II.

    Carlson said on X that Cooper “may be the best and most honest popular historian in the United States” when posting The Tucker Carlson Show Monday episode, which featured topics like Christianity and authoritarians like Viktor Orbán and Vladimir Putin.


    https://www.thedailybeast.com/tucker-carlson-slammed-after-hosting-nazi-apologist-on-podcast

    Some Yank historian called Darryl Cooper reckons "Winston Churchill is the chief villain of World War 2".

    He's going to shit his fucking pants when he reads up about the other guy.


    https://x.com/thesundaysport/status/1831223073611104393
    Nope. He's a Hitler stan apparently

    https://x.com/yashar/status/1831129276026134572
    A Hitler fan on Fucker Carlson's show?

    No, I refuse to believe that.
    I expect he is.

    I can see a case of depicting Winston Churchill as villain from the American isolationist perspective. It hinges on what date you consider the start of WW2:

    1937 for China and Japan
    1939 for Britain, Germany, France, Italy
    1941 for Russia and the USA

    Churchill made great efforts to involve America in the European War, and in pushing for a Germany first policy, rather than a Pacific war against Japan.

    The argument rather falls down as it was Hitler that declared war on the USA, not vice versa.
    Germany was the most dangerous enemy, so that made sense even if it was Japan that actually hit America first.
    Certainly from our perspective, less so from the American, and even less so from the Australian.

    The Pacific War had to wait more for logistic reasons. It takes a while to build all those ships
  • eekeek Posts: 28,585

    eek said:

    FF43 said:

    FPT

    HYUFD said:

    'Kemi Badenoch called for rich pensioners to lose their winter fuel payments during her 2022 Tory leadership launch.

    Newly resurfaced clip shows she argued for means-testing. Notable given she’s criticised Labour for scrapping payments for all.'
    https://x.com/benrileysmith/status/1831079967586931063

    That seems to me to be a coherent position. And also one I agree with. Scrapping for all except those on benefits seems to me too extreme. But a proper system of means testing with a reasonable cut off does seem appropriate. It is something I would apply to all benefits including the 'middle class' ones like Child Benefit.
    I would scrap Winter Fuel Payment entirely on grounds of efficiency and if necessary adjust Pension Credit, which is the means by which older people with inadequate pensions get topped up. You might decide other poorer people, not just the old, struggle with fuel bills and adjust Universal Credit. This might not save any money compared with the status quo but it has the benefit of being a lot more equitable.

    In short Winter Fuel Payment is an indefensible benefit in its previous form and Reeves, Starmer and previously Badenoch were correct in wanting to change it. Perhaps they didn't handle the politics particularly well but they are right on the principle.

    ,.............

    And add, Badenoch is disingenuous in her claims that her means testing is different from Labour's means testing. Of course her attacks on Starmer and Reeves are entirely hypocritical and she's been found out.
    Not at all. She has suggested a proper system of means testing not just defaulting to the current unsuitable benefits threshhold. As I said on the previous page it is a coherent position and attacks like yours seem to be predicated on the simple pont that you don't like Badenoch rather than any proper examination of what she is saying. Your original comment copied from the previous thread is sensible. The random attack on Badenoch you have tacked on here is not.
    Isn't the problem then that a separate means test creates another layer of bureaucracy, swallowing up a decent slice of the savings?

    I guess the other question is where KB would draw the line. Wherever it goes, some people will be the wrong side of the cutoff.
    The easiest fix would be to claw it back by some means or other while paying it to everyone.

    But clawing it back via income tax (as is done with universal) would result in both pensioners being taxed so there really is no easy fix here - I think you end up with something like Martin Lewis suggested using council tax bands to pay it (and equally that would require combining 2 data sources to do so)
    Set the state pension rate at the rate of the tax-free allowance. Raise them both together. Any additional income is taxed. Problem solved.
    How does that give winter fuel allowance to those who need it and not just the very poorest on pension credit
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,521
    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Wait until Tucker and this 'historian' hear about the other guy.

    Liberals and conservatives alike have turned on Tucker Carlson after controversial podcaster and self-proclaimed historian Darryl Cooper claimed on Carlson’s show that “millions of people ended up dead” in Nazi concentration camps.

    Cooper also painted U.K. prime minister Winston Churchill as the “chief villain” of World War II.

    Carlson said on X that Cooper “may be the best and most honest popular historian in the United States” when posting The Tucker Carlson Show Monday episode, which featured topics like Christianity and authoritarians like Viktor Orbán and Vladimir Putin.


    https://www.thedailybeast.com/tucker-carlson-slammed-after-hosting-nazi-apologist-on-podcast

    Some Yank historian called Darryl Cooper reckons "Winston Churchill is the chief villain of World War 2".

    He's going to shit his fucking pants when he reads up about the other guy.


    https://x.com/thesundaysport/status/1831223073611104393
    Nope. He's a Hitler stan apparently

    https://x.com/yashar/status/1831129276026134572
    A Hitler fan on Fucker Carlson's show?

    No, I refuse to believe that.
    I expect he is.

    I can see a case of depicting Winston Churchill as villain from the American isolationist perspective. It hinges on what date you consider the start of WW2:

    1937 for China and Japan
    1939 for Britain, Germany, France, Italy
    1941 for Russia and the USA

    Churchill made great efforts to involve America in the European War, and in pushing for a Germany first policy, rather than a Pacific war against Japan.

    The argument rather falls down as it was Hitler that declared war on the USA, not vice versa.
    Germany was the most dangerous enemy, so that made sense even if it was Japan that actually hit America first.
    Certainly from our perspective, less so from the American, and even less so from the Australian.

    The Pacific War had to wait more for logistic reasons. It takes a while to build all those ships
    I only found out recently that the Royal Navy took part in the Battle of Okinawa. In fact, by the end of the war, the British Pacific Fleet was immense. Over a million British, Empire and Commonwealth soldiers were set to invade Japan.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496

    I suspect the key question is whether this is a story researched by the Telegraph's own hacks, or from the "dealing with the opposition" department of one of the other campaigns.

    In other news, The Times have a leaked recording of Robert Jenrick saying that immigration is bad for Birmingham;

    https://www.thetimes.com/article/57dcef2e-2647-4798-815f-f0985157d838?shareToken=52c7f1b3aef0795f3a50ef6ff846ca03

    Though that may have been leaked by Jenrick, of course.

    A lefty friend of mine recently had to do a series of photo essays in Birmingham. He came back to north London basically an AfD voter
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,857
    Nice example of how politics works WRT nuance and accuracy.

    Kemi says, at different times:
    1) Rich pensioners should not receive WFA
    2) Removing WFA from pensioners on incomes of £13K or a bit above is wrong.

    These thoughts are of course entirely consistent with each other and with thoughtful reason. IMHO they are also both true.

    None of this will stop attempts to demolish her over it.

    NB I don't support her for the leadership, though if she gets it, life will be slightly more interesting.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496
    edited September 4
    Scott_xP said:

    @elonmusk

    A Trump victory is essential to defense of freedom of speech, secure borders, safe cities and sensible spending!

    @SethAbramson

    (📣) The President of Brazil has issued a statement about Twitter:

    “The world isn’t obliged to put up with Elon Musk’s far-right free-for-all just because he is rich.”

    https://x.com/SethAbramson/status/1831169253426262228

    It’s a free market. No one is forcing people to read Twitter. It’s also a private company

    If you don’t like it there are other social media

    Remember, these are all the arguments lefties trot out when right wingers complain about liberal left Facebook, pre-Musk Twitter, Woke Google, etc
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,857

    eek said:

    FF43 said:

    FPT

    HYUFD said:

    'Kemi Badenoch called for rich pensioners to lose their winter fuel payments during her 2022 Tory leadership launch.

    Newly resurfaced clip shows she argued for means-testing. Notable given she’s criticised Labour for scrapping payments for all.'
    https://x.com/benrileysmith/status/1831079967586931063

    That seems to me to be a coherent position. And also one I agree with. Scrapping for all except those on benefits seems to me too extreme. But a proper system of means testing with a reasonable cut off does seem appropriate. It is something I would apply to all benefits including the 'middle class' ones like Child Benefit.
    I would scrap Winter Fuel Payment entirely on grounds of efficiency and if necessary adjust Pension Credit, which is the means by which older people with inadequate pensions get topped up. You might decide other poorer people, not just the old, struggle with fuel bills and adjust Universal Credit. This might not save any money compared with the status quo but it has the benefit of being a lot more equitable.

    In short Winter Fuel Payment is an indefensible benefit in its previous form and Reeves, Starmer and previously Badenoch were correct in wanting to change it. Perhaps they didn't handle the politics particularly well but they are right on the principle.

    ,.............

    And add, Badenoch is disingenuous in her claims that her means testing is different from Labour's means testing. Of course her attacks on Starmer and Reeves are entirely hypocritical and she's been found out.
    Not at all. She has suggested a proper system of means testing not just defaulting to the current unsuitable benefits threshhold. As I said on the previous page it is a coherent position and attacks like yours seem to be predicated on the simple pont that you don't like Badenoch rather than any proper examination of what she is saying. Your original comment copied from the previous thread is sensible. The random attack on Badenoch you have tacked on here is not.
    Isn't the problem then that a separate means test creates another layer of bureaucracy, swallowing up a decent slice of the savings?

    I guess the other question is where KB would draw the line. Wherever it goes, some people will be the wrong side of the cutoff.
    The easiest fix would be to claw it back by some means or other while paying it to everyone.

    But clawing it back via income tax (as is done with universal) would result in both pensioners being taxed so there really is no easy fix here - I think you end up with something like Martin Lewis suggested using council tax bands to pay it (and equally that would require combining 2 data sources to do so)
    Set the state pension rate at the rate of the tax-free allowance. Raise them both together. Any additional income is taxed. Problem solved.
    Can't work for now, if at all. Fiscal drag is essential for the government to increase the tax take while not raising the headline rates.

    Personally I think pensioner (I am one) tax should be on the same basis as earned income tax/NIC, by abolishing employee NIC and setting the same IT rate for all groups.

    BTW why should wealthy pensioners get cheap rail and free bus travel.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,668
    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Wait until Tucker and this 'historian' hear about the other guy.

    Liberals and conservatives alike have turned on Tucker Carlson after controversial podcaster and self-proclaimed historian Darryl Cooper claimed on Carlson’s show that “millions of people ended up dead” in Nazi concentration camps.

    Cooper also painted U.K. prime minister Winston Churchill as the “chief villain” of World War II.

    Carlson said on X that Cooper “may be the best and most honest popular historian in the United States” when posting The Tucker Carlson Show Monday episode, which featured topics like Christianity and authoritarians like Viktor Orbán and Vladimir Putin.


    https://www.thedailybeast.com/tucker-carlson-slammed-after-hosting-nazi-apologist-on-podcast

    Some Yank historian called Darryl Cooper reckons "Winston Churchill is the chief villain of World War 2".

    He's going to shit his fucking pants when he reads up about the other guy.


    https://x.com/thesundaysport/status/1831223073611104393
    Nope. He's a Hitler stan apparently

    https://x.com/yashar/status/1831129276026134572
    A Hitler fan on Fucker Carlson's show?

    No, I refuse to believe that.
    I expect he is.

    I can see a case of depicting Winston Churchill as villain from the American isolationist perspective. It hinges on what date you consider the start of WW2:

    1937 for China and Japan
    1939 for Britain, Germany, France, Italy
    1941 for Russia and the USA

    Churchill made great efforts to involve America in the European War, and in pushing for a Germany first policy, rather than a Pacific war against Japan.

    The argument rather falls down as it was Hitler that declared war on the USA, not vice versa.
    Germany was the most dangerous enemy, so that made sense even if it was Japan that actually hit America first.
    Certainly from our perspective, less so from the American, and even less so from the Australian.

    The Pacific War had to wait more for logistic reasons. It takes a while to build all those ships
    No, because Japan depended on oil for its fleet that could be, and was, easily cut-off and couldn't project much force thereafter, nor did it innovate much in technology.

    Germany was developing nuclear weapons, jet fighters, cutting-edge tanks and effectively projecting force with submarines - and could have gone further unchecked, particularly if the Soviets had been defeated.

    Germany was a bigger threat to the US.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,668
    Sean_F said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Wait until Tucker and this 'historian' hear about the other guy.

    Liberals and conservatives alike have turned on Tucker Carlson after controversial podcaster and self-proclaimed historian Darryl Cooper claimed on Carlson’s show that “millions of people ended up dead” in Nazi concentration camps.

    Cooper also painted U.K. prime minister Winston Churchill as the “chief villain” of World War II.

    Carlson said on X that Cooper “may be the best and most honest popular historian in the United States” when posting The Tucker Carlson Show Monday episode, which featured topics like Christianity and authoritarians like Viktor Orbán and Vladimir Putin.


    https://www.thedailybeast.com/tucker-carlson-slammed-after-hosting-nazi-apologist-on-podcast

    Some Yank historian called Darryl Cooper reckons "Winston Churchill is the chief villain of World War 2".

    He's going to shit his fucking pants when he reads up about the other guy.


    https://x.com/thesundaysport/status/1831223073611104393
    Nope. He's a Hitler stan apparently

    https://x.com/yashar/status/1831129276026134572
    A Hitler fan on Fucker Carlson's show?

    No, I refuse to believe that.
    I expect he is.

    I can see a case of depicting Winston Churchill as villain from the American isolationist perspective. It hinges on what date you consider the start of WW2:

    1937 for China and Japan
    1939 for Britain, Germany, France, Italy
    1941 for Russia and the USA

    Churchill made great efforts to involve America in the European War, and in pushing for a Germany first policy, rather than a Pacific war against Japan.

    The argument rather falls down as it was Hitler that declared war on the USA, not vice versa.
    Germany was the most dangerous enemy, so that made sense even if it was Japan that actually hit America first.
    Certainly from our perspective, less so from the American, and even less so from the Australian.

    The Pacific War had to wait more for logistic reasons. It takes a while to build all those ships
    I only found out recently that the Royal Navy took part in the Battle of Okinawa. In fact, by the end of the war, the British Pacific Fleet was immense. Over a million British, Empire and Commonwealth soldiers were set to invade Japan.
    I'd like to read more about it, it's been hardly written about.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,435

    kamski said:

    Wait until Tucker and this 'historian' hear about the other guy.

    Liberals and conservatives alike have turned on Tucker Carlson after controversial podcaster and self-proclaimed historian Darryl Cooper claimed on Carlson’s show that “millions of people ended up dead” in Nazi concentration camps.

    Cooper also painted U.K. prime minister Winston Churchill as the “chief villain” of World War II.

    Carlson said on X that Cooper “may be the best and most honest popular historian in the United States” when posting The Tucker Carlson Show Monday episode, which featured topics like Christianity and authoritarians like Viktor Orbán and Vladimir Putin.


    https://www.thedailybeast.com/tucker-carlson-slammed-after-hosting-nazi-apologist-on-podcast

    Some Yank historian called Darryl Cooper reckons "Winston Churchill is the chief villain of World War 2".

    He's going to shit his fucking pants when he reads up about the other guy.


    https://x.com/thesundaysport/status/1831223073611104393
    A maverick historian no doubt.

    “Very interesting. Worth watching,” wrote fellow maverick Elon Musk. https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1830856758505402374

    Ah those fun-loving mavericks
    High status males is I believe the correct term.
    It's unfortunate most of them seem to have the emotional development of a 14 year old.
    Ah, that explains @Leon then... ;)
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,864
    Badenoch is backed by Gove and was introduced by Francis Maude at her launch and also allegedly by Dougie Smith if you believe Nadine Dorries in her book who was also behind Sunak and part of Portillo's old team which switched to Cameron and Osborne.

    The winter fuel story might hit her a bit with members, if she fails to make the top two with Tory MPs today it will have hit her with them too
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496

    Sean_F said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Wait until Tucker and this 'historian' hear about the other guy.

    Liberals and conservatives alike have turned on Tucker Carlson after controversial podcaster and self-proclaimed historian Darryl Cooper claimed on Carlson’s show that “millions of people ended up dead” in Nazi concentration camps.

    Cooper also painted U.K. prime minister Winston Churchill as the “chief villain” of World War II.

    Carlson said on X that Cooper “may be the best and most honest popular historian in the United States” when posting The Tucker Carlson Show Monday episode, which featured topics like Christianity and authoritarians like Viktor Orbán and Vladimir Putin.


    https://www.thedailybeast.com/tucker-carlson-slammed-after-hosting-nazi-apologist-on-podcast

    Some Yank historian called Darryl Cooper reckons "Winston Churchill is the chief villain of World War 2".

    He's going to shit his fucking pants when he reads up about the other guy.


    https://x.com/thesundaysport/status/1831223073611104393
    Nope. He's a Hitler stan apparently

    https://x.com/yashar/status/1831129276026134572
    A Hitler fan on Fucker Carlson's show?

    No, I refuse to believe that.
    I expect he is.

    I can see a case of depicting Winston Churchill as villain from the American isolationist perspective. It hinges on what date you consider the start of WW2:

    1937 for China and Japan
    1939 for Britain, Germany, France, Italy
    1941 for Russia and the USA

    Churchill made great efforts to involve America in the European War, and in pushing for a Germany first policy, rather than a Pacific war against Japan.

    The argument rather falls down as it was Hitler that declared war on the USA, not vice versa.
    Germany was the most dangerous enemy, so that made sense even if it was Japan that actually hit America first.
    Certainly from our perspective, less so from the American, and even less so from the Australian.

    The Pacific War had to wait more for logistic reasons. It takes a while to build all those ships
    I only found out recently that the Royal Navy took part in the Battle of Okinawa. In fact, by the end of the war, the British Pacific Fleet was immense. Over a million British, Empire and Commonwealth soldiers were set to invade Japan.
    I'd like to read more about it, it's been hardly written about.
    I’d also like to know how this country has gone from being the greatest empire on earth, with an “immense Pacific fleet” and a million men under arms in the Far East, to being so spineless and craven we cannot even defend the English Channel AND ALL WITHIN LIVING MEMORY

    It must be the greatest and fastest decline in human history?
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,515
    edited September 4
    eek said:

    eek said:

    FF43 said:

    FPT

    HYUFD said:

    'Kemi Badenoch called for rich pensioners to lose their winter fuel payments during her 2022 Tory leadership launch.

    Newly resurfaced clip shows she argued for means-testing. Notable given she’s criticised Labour for scrapping payments for all.'
    https://x.com/benrileysmith/status/1831079967586931063

    That seems to me to be a coherent position. And also one I agree with. Scrapping for all except those on benefits seems to me too extreme. But a proper system of means testing with a reasonable cut off does seem appropriate. It is something I would apply to all benefits including the 'middle class' ones like Child Benefit.
    I would scrap Winter Fuel Payment entirely on grounds of efficiency and if necessary adjust Pension Credit, which is the means by which older people with inadequate pensions get topped up. You might decide other poorer people, not just the old, struggle with fuel bills and adjust Universal Credit. This might not save any money compared with the status quo but it has the benefit of being a lot more equitable.

    In short Winter Fuel Payment is an indefensible benefit in its previous form and Reeves, Starmer and previously Badenoch were correct in wanting to change it. Perhaps they didn't handle the politics particularly well but they are right on the principle.

    ,.............

    And add, Badenoch is disingenuous in her claims that her means testing is different from Labour's means testing. Of course her attacks on Starmer and Reeves are entirely hypocritical and she's been found out.
    Not at all. She has suggested a proper system of means testing not just defaulting to the current unsuitable benefits threshhold. As I said on the previous page it is a coherent position and attacks like yours seem to be predicated on the simple pont that you don't like Badenoch rather than any proper examination of what she is saying. Your original comment copied from the previous thread is sensible. The random attack on Badenoch you have tacked on here is not.
    Isn't the problem then that a separate means test creates another layer of bureaucracy, swallowing up a decent slice of the savings?

    I guess the other question is where KB would draw the line. Wherever it goes, some people will be the wrong side of the cutoff.
    The easiest fix would be to claw it back by some means or other while paying it to everyone.

    But clawing it back via income tax (as is done with universal) would result in both pensioners being taxed so there really is no easy fix here - I think you end up with something like Martin Lewis suggested using council tax bands to pay it (and equally that would require combining 2 data sources to do so)
    Set the state pension rate at the rate of the tax-free allowance. Raise them both together. Any additional income is taxed. Problem solved.
    How does that give winter fuel allowance to those who need it and not just the very poorest on pension credit
    The point is to set them both high enough to avoid the need for means tested benefits but then tax income above that (combining NI and Income Tax obviously) at a higher rate.
  • eek said:

    FF43 said:

    FPT

    HYUFD said:

    'Kemi Badenoch called for rich pensioners to lose their winter fuel payments during her 2022 Tory leadership launch.

    Newly resurfaced clip shows she argued for means-testing. Notable given she’s criticised Labour for scrapping payments for all.'
    https://x.com/benrileysmith/status/1831079967586931063

    That seems to me to be a coherent position. And also one I agree with. Scrapping for all except those on benefits seems to me too extreme. But a proper system of means testing with a reasonable cut off does seem appropriate. It is something I would apply to all benefits including the 'middle class' ones like Child Benefit.
    I would scrap Winter Fuel Payment entirely on grounds of efficiency and if necessary adjust Pension Credit, which is the means by which older people with inadequate pensions get topped up. You might decide other poorer people, not just the old, struggle with fuel bills and adjust Universal Credit. This might not save any money compared with the status quo but it has the benefit of being a lot more equitable.

    In short Winter Fuel Payment is an indefensible benefit in its previous form and Reeves, Starmer and previously Badenoch were correct in wanting to change it. Perhaps they didn't handle the politics particularly well but they are right on the principle.

    ,.............

    And add, Badenoch is disingenuous in her claims that her means testing is different from Labour's means testing. Of course her attacks on Starmer and Reeves are entirely hypocritical and she's been found out.
    There is a certain amount of logic in providing the money as an obvious one off payment at a point where the money could be paid directly to your energy company. By just increasing the rate by £6 a week that benefit would be lost and the money received in the summer lost before expensive fuel bills arrived.
    Then have a higher rate of pension in the winter months. Though the usual suspects would then moan about the "cut" in March or April.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,236
    algarkirk said:

    Nice example of how politics works WRT nuance and accuracy.

    Kemi says, at different times:
    1) Rich pensioners should not receive WFA
    2) Removing WFA from pensioners on incomes of £13K or a bit above is wrong.

    These thoughts are of course entirely consistent with each other and with thoughtful reason. IMHO they are also both true.

    None of this will stop attempts to demolish her over it.

    NB I don't support her for the leadership, though if she gets it, life will be slightly more interesting.

    She actually said per the quote above "I'm not going to give people 50 pounds cash here, a rebate there. I think it's very inefficient. I have people telling me they don't need the winter fuel payments we give them" and said nothing about means testing WFP, which in any case seems incompatible with her statement.
  • I don't see what is wrong with Kemi's position, as a principle, it falls down only because it is technically very difficult as taxes are paid as an individual but WFA is per household, but stopping very wealthy from getting WFA is hardly an unconservative thing. Restricting it to £11,500 pension credit ceiling is pretty monstrous though.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,082

    Scott_xP said:

    Wait until Tucker and this 'historian' hear about the other guy.

    Liberals and conservatives alike have turned on Tucker Carlson after controversial podcaster and self-proclaimed historian Darryl Cooper claimed on Carlson’s show that “millions of people ended up dead” in Nazi concentration camps.

    Cooper also painted U.K. prime minister Winston Churchill as the “chief villain” of World War II.

    Carlson said on X that Cooper “may be the best and most honest popular historian in the United States” when posting The Tucker Carlson Show Monday episode, which featured topics like Christianity and authoritarians like Viktor Orbán and Vladimir Putin.


    https://www.thedailybeast.com/tucker-carlson-slammed-after-hosting-nazi-apologist-on-podcast

    Some Yank historian called Darryl Cooper reckons "Winston Churchill is the chief villain of World War 2".

    He's going to shit his fucking pants when he reads up about the other guy.


    https://x.com/thesundaysport/status/1831223073611104393
    Nope. He's a Hitler stan apparently

    https://x.com/yashar/status/1831129276026134572
    A Hitler fan on Fucker Carlson's show?

    No, I refuse to believe that.
    Thank you.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,880
    edited September 4
    Good morning everyone.

    On topic ... ish ... my photo quota today is entitled "The Morning After the Conservative Party Leadership Announcement." * The detail is wonderful in this one - well worth a RightClick-Open Image. Which leadership contender is the bloke lying down with his drink in the middle?

    * I may be lying about the title. Credit Accidental Renaissance Paintings Facebook Group, as previously.
  • FF43 said:

    FPT

    HYUFD said:

    'Kemi Badenoch called for rich pensioners to lose their winter fuel payments during her 2022 Tory leadership launch.

    Newly resurfaced clip shows she argued for means-testing. Notable given she’s criticised Labour for scrapping payments for all.'
    https://x.com/benrileysmith/status/1831079967586931063

    That seems to me to be a coherent position. And also one I agree with. Scrapping for all except those on benefits seems to me too extreme. But a proper system of means testing with a reasonable cut off does seem appropriate. It is something I would apply to all benefits including the 'middle class' ones like Child Benefit.
    I would scrap Winter Fuel Payment entirely on grounds of efficiency and if necessary adjust Pension Credit, which is the means by which older people with inadequate pensions get topped up. You might decide other poorer people, not just the old, struggle with fuel bills and adjust Universal Credit. This might not save any money compared with the status quo but it has the benefit of being a lot more equitable.

    In short Winter Fuel Payment is an indefensible benefit in its previous form and Reeves, Starmer and previously Badenoch were correct in wanting to change it. Perhaps they didn't handle the politics particularly well but they are right on the principle.

    ,.............

    And add, Badenoch is disingenuous in her claims that her means testing is different from Labour's means testing. Of course her attacks on Starmer and Reeves are entirely hypocritical and she's been found out.
    Not really, one is everyone under £48k gets it, the other everyone (who fills out the 200+ question form) under £11.5k gets it.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,857
    Foxy said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Wait until Tucker and this 'historian' hear about the other guy.

    Liberals and conservatives alike have turned on Tucker Carlson after controversial podcaster and self-proclaimed historian Darryl Cooper claimed on Carlson’s show that “millions of people ended up dead” in Nazi concentration camps.

    Cooper also painted U.K. prime minister Winston Churchill as the “chief villain” of World War II.

    Carlson said on X that Cooper “may be the best and most honest popular historian in the United States” when posting The Tucker Carlson Show Monday episode, which featured topics like Christianity and authoritarians like Viktor Orbán and Vladimir Putin.


    https://www.thedailybeast.com/tucker-carlson-slammed-after-hosting-nazi-apologist-on-podcast

    Some Yank historian called Darryl Cooper reckons "Winston Churchill is the chief villain of World War 2".

    He's going to shit his fucking pants when he reads up about the other guy.


    https://x.com/thesundaysport/status/1831223073611104393
    Nope. He's a Hitler stan apparently

    https://x.com/yashar/status/1831129276026134572
    A Hitler fan on Fucker Carlson's show?

    No, I refuse to believe that.
    I expect he is.

    I can see a case of depicting Winston Churchill as villain from the American isolationist perspective. It hinges on what date you consider the start of WW2:

    1937 for China and Japan
    1939 for Britain, Germany, France, Italy
    1941 for Russia and the USA

    Churchill made great efforts to involve America in the European War, and in pushing for a Germany first policy, rather than a Pacific war against Japan.

    The argument rather falls down as it was Hitler that declared war on the USA, not vice versa.
    Another way of dating WWs is to see a start to a continuous global conflict of powers at or before 1914, with a process continuing until 6th August 1945 and the post 1945 settlements, military and political, a process which gave us those 1950-2000 years, which were pretty good in many ways, so the 20th C divides neatly into two halves.

    And, on this thesis, sometime around 2000 (9/11/2001 possibly) the end of history ended, and global conflict history started again. I don't have really good reasons to think this analysis is entirely wrong but I wish I did.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,515
    MattW said:

    Good morning everyone.

    On topic ... ish ... my photo quota today is entitled "The Morning After the Conservative Party Leadership Announcement." *



    * I may be lying about the title. Credit Accidental Renaissance Paintings Facebook Group, as previously.

    Would be interesting to hear your thoughts later on the Grenfell Report.
  • pm215pm215 Posts: 1,153
    algarkirk said:

    eek said:

    FF43 said:

    FPT

    HYUFD said:

    'Kemi Badenoch called for rich pensioners to lose their winter fuel payments during her 2022 Tory leadership launch.

    Newly resurfaced clip shows she argued for means-testing. Notable given she’s criticised Labour for scrapping payments for all.'
    https://x.com/benrileysmith/status/1831079967586931063

    That seems to me to be a coherent position. And also one I agree with. Scrapping for all except those on benefits seems to me too extreme. But a proper system of means testing with a reasonable cut off does seem appropriate. It is something I would apply to all benefits including the 'middle class' ones like Child Benefit.
    I would scrap Winter Fuel Payment entirely on grounds of efficiency and if necessary adjust Pension Credit, which is the means by which older people with inadequate pensions get topped up. You might decide other poorer people, not just the old, struggle with fuel bills and adjust Universal Credit. This might not save any money compared with the status quo but it has the benefit of being a lot more equitable.

    In short Winter Fuel Payment is an indefensible benefit in its previous form and Reeves, Starmer and previously Badenoch were correct in wanting to change it. Perhaps they didn't handle the politics particularly well but they are right on the principle.

    ,.............

    And add, Badenoch is disingenuous in her claims that her means testing is different from Labour's means testing. Of course her attacks on Starmer and Reeves are entirely hypocritical and she's been found out.
    Not at all. She has suggested a proper system of means testing not just defaulting to the current unsuitable benefits threshhold. As I said on the previous page it is a coherent position and attacks like yours seem to be predicated on the simple pont that you don't like Badenoch rather than any proper examination of what she is saying. Your original comment copied from the previous thread is sensible. The random attack on Badenoch you have tacked on here is not.
    Isn't the problem then that a separate means test creates another layer of bureaucracy, swallowing up a decent slice of the savings?

    I guess the other question is where KB would draw the line. Wherever it goes, some people will be the wrong side of the cutoff.
    The easiest fix would be to claw it back by some means or other while paying it to everyone.

    But clawing it back via income tax (as is done with universal) would result in both pensioners being taxed so there really is no easy fix here - I think you end up with something like Martin Lewis suggested using council tax bands to pay it (and equally that would require combining 2 data sources to do so)
    Set the state pension rate at the rate of the tax-free allowance. Raise them both together. Any additional income is taxed. Problem solved.
    Can't work for now, if at all. Fiscal drag is essential for the government to increase the tax take while not raising the headline rates.

    Personally I think pensioner (I am one) tax should be on the same basis as earned income tax/NIC, by abolishing employee NIC and setting the same IT rate for all groups.

    BTW why should wealthy pensioners get cheap rail and free bus travel.
    The rail travel one in particular is weird -- you can get a railcard for 30% off if you're under 30, or over 60, or a veteran, or disabled, or you travel with another person, or you travel in the old Network SouthEast area. The latter is an egregious random historical anomaly. I think they should simplify all this and have a railcard that's open to everybody everywhere, which is basically a "pay for the railcard and you get cheaper fares but you must travel off peak" demand smoothing tool and incentive to use rail a bit more. (But then I'm biased since I'm currently between 30 and 60 and my most common journey is just outside the NSE area :-))

  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,895

    Foxy said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Wait until Tucker and this 'historian' hear about the other guy.

    Liberals and conservatives alike have turned on Tucker Carlson after controversial podcaster and self-proclaimed historian Darryl Cooper claimed on Carlson’s show that “millions of people ended up dead” in Nazi concentration camps.

    Cooper also painted U.K. prime minister Winston Churchill as the “chief villain” of World War II.

    Carlson said on X that Cooper “may be the best and most honest popular historian in the United States” when posting The Tucker Carlson Show Monday episode, which featured topics like Christianity and authoritarians like Viktor Orbán and Vladimir Putin.


    https://www.thedailybeast.com/tucker-carlson-slammed-after-hosting-nazi-apologist-on-podcast

    Some Yank historian called Darryl Cooper reckons "Winston Churchill is the chief villain of World War 2".

    He's going to shit his fucking pants when he reads up about the other guy.


    https://x.com/thesundaysport/status/1831223073611104393
    Nope. He's a Hitler stan apparently

    https://x.com/yashar/status/1831129276026134572
    A Hitler fan on Fucker Carlson's show?

    No, I refuse to believe that.
    I expect he is.

    I can see a case of depicting Winston Churchill as villain from the American isolationist perspective. It hinges on what date you consider the start of WW2:

    1937 for China and Japan
    1939 for Britain, Germany, France, Italy
    1941 for Russia and the USA

    Churchill made great efforts to involve America in the European War, and in pushing for a Germany first policy, rather than a Pacific war against Japan.

    The argument rather falls down as it was Hitler that declared war on the USA, not vice versa.
    Germany was the most dangerous enemy, so that made sense even if it was Japan that actually hit America first.
    A Pacific-first policy might have seen the USSR liberate Paris, which would have made the post-war period a bit more difficult. Given Churchill's longstanding anti-Soviet actions, I would imagine that this was a major factor in the calculus.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,082
    Leon said:

    Sean_F said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Wait until Tucker and this 'historian' hear about the other guy.

    Liberals and conservatives alike have turned on Tucker Carlson after controversial podcaster and self-proclaimed historian Darryl Cooper claimed on Carlson’s show that “millions of people ended up dead” in Nazi concentration camps.

    Cooper also painted U.K. prime minister Winston Churchill as the “chief villain” of World War II.

    Carlson said on X that Cooper “may be the best and most honest popular historian in the United States” when posting The Tucker Carlson Show Monday episode, which featured topics like Christianity and authoritarians like Viktor Orbán and Vladimir Putin.


    https://www.thedailybeast.com/tucker-carlson-slammed-after-hosting-nazi-apologist-on-podcast

    Some Yank historian called Darryl Cooper reckons "Winston Churchill is the chief villain of World War 2".

    He's going to shit his fucking pants when he reads up about the other guy.


    https://x.com/thesundaysport/status/1831223073611104393
    Nope. He's a Hitler stan apparently

    https://x.com/yashar/status/1831129276026134572
    A Hitler fan on Fucker Carlson's show?

    No, I refuse to believe that.
    I expect he is.

    I can see a case of depicting Winston Churchill as villain from the American isolationist perspective. It hinges on what date you consider the start of WW2:

    1937 for China and Japan
    1939 for Britain, Germany, France, Italy
    1941 for Russia and the USA

    Churchill made great efforts to involve America in the European War, and in pushing for a Germany first policy, rather than a Pacific war against Japan.

    The argument rather falls down as it was Hitler that declared war on the USA, not vice versa.
    Germany was the most dangerous enemy, so that made sense even if it was Japan that actually hit America first.
    Certainly from our perspective, less so from the American, and even less so from the Australian.

    The Pacific War had to wait more for logistic reasons. It takes a while to build all those ships
    I only found out recently that the Royal Navy took part in the Battle of Okinawa. In fact, by the end of the war, the British Pacific Fleet was immense. Over a million British, Empire and Commonwealth soldiers were set to invade Japan.
    I'd like to read more about it, it's been hardly written about.
    I’d also like to know how this country has gone from being the greatest empire on earth, with an “immense Pacific fleet” and a million men under arms in the Far East, to being so spineless and craven we cannot even defend the English Channel AND ALL WITHIN LIVING MEMORY

    It must be the greatest and fastest decline in human history?
    The Royal Navy, at its zenith was unable to stop small boats crossing the channel.

    Not just brandy and tobacco. Read up on the death-or-money boats.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496
    HYUFD said:

    Badenoch is backed by Gove and was introduced by Francis Maude at her launch and also allegedly by Dougie Smith if you believe Nadine Dorries in her book who was also behind Sunak and part of Portillo's old team which switched to Cameron and Osborne.

    The winter fuel story might hit her a bit with members, if she fails to make the top two with Tory MPs today it will have hit her with them too

    Badenoch will, I fear, be a weak leader. She’s basically Davos woman but with an anti-woke agenda

    I like her but she is insubstantial and globalist, she is also too young. Perhaps with another decade she will be more interesting

    Out of a poor selection, probably Jenrick is the best, but I’m not overly hopeful

    Meanwhile Reform is mainly gammons and Farage is the only star, and he’s over 60

    It’s a damn shame as this Labour govt is risibly poor, already, and a good right wing opposition could mince them


  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,946
    Good morning, everyone.

    Mr. Leon, it isn't even the greatest decline in British history. When the Romans left, things collapsed. De-urbanisation, trade absolutely dislocated, loss of military capacity, coinage giving way to barter, political fragmentation, endemic warfare, collapsing living standards.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 63,114
    Jenrick seems to be being supported by a higher number of whacko tory MPs than the others.

  • eek said:

    FF43 said:

    FPT

    HYUFD said:

    'Kemi Badenoch called for rich pensioners to lose their winter fuel payments during her 2022 Tory leadership launch.

    Newly resurfaced clip shows she argued for means-testing. Notable given she’s criticised Labour for scrapping payments for all.'
    https://x.com/benrileysmith/status/1831079967586931063

    That seems to me to be a coherent position. And also one I agree with. Scrapping for all except those on benefits seems to me too extreme. But a proper system of means testing with a reasonable cut off does seem appropriate. It is something I would apply to all benefits including the 'middle class' ones like Child Benefit.
    I would scrap Winter Fuel Payment entirely on grounds of efficiency and if necessary adjust Pension Credit, which is the means by which older people with inadequate pensions get topped up. You might decide other poorer people, not just the old, struggle with fuel bills and adjust Universal Credit. This might not save any money compared with the status quo but it has the benefit of being a lot more equitable.

    In short Winter Fuel Payment is an indefensible benefit in its previous form and Reeves, Starmer and previously Badenoch were correct in wanting to change it. Perhaps they didn't handle the politics particularly well but they are right on the principle.

    ,.............

    And add, Badenoch is disingenuous in her claims that her means testing is different from Labour's means testing. Of course her attacks on Starmer and Reeves are entirely hypocritical and she's been found out.
    Not at all. She has suggested a proper system of means testing not just defaulting to the current unsuitable benefits threshhold. As I said on the previous page it is a coherent position and attacks like yours seem to be predicated on the simple pont that you don't like Badenoch rather than any proper examination of what she is saying. Your original comment copied from the previous thread is sensible. The random attack on Badenoch you have tacked on here is not.
    Isn't the problem then that a separate means test creates another layer of bureaucracy, swallowing up a decent slice of the savings?

    I guess the other question is where KB would draw the line. Wherever it goes, some people will be the wrong side of the cutoff.
    The easiest fix would be to claw it back by some means or other while paying it to everyone.

    But clawing it back via income tax (as is done with universal) would result in both pensioners being taxed so there really is no easy fix here - I think you end up with something like Martin Lewis suggested using council tax bands to pay it (and equally that would require combining 2 data sources to do so)
    Set the state pension rate at the rate of the tax-free allowance. Raise them both together. Any additional income is taxed. Problem solved.
    At the point you get to the tax free allowance do you abandon the triple lock, or make it a quadruple lock?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,864
    HYUFD said:

    Badenoch is backed by Gove and was introduced by Francis Maude at her launch and also allegedly by Dougie Smith if you believe Nadine Dorries in her book who was also behind Sunak and part of Portillo's old team which switched to Cameron and Osborne.

    The winter fuel story might hit her a bit with members, if she fails to make the top two with Tory MPs today it will have hit her with them too

    Francis Maude's endorsement of Kemi Badenoch in the Telegraph

    "Kemi Badenoch's stardust is the one chance we have to get it right first time" https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/08/03/kemi-badenoch-stardust-one-chance-right-first-time/
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496
    edited September 4

    Leon said:

    Sean_F said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Wait until Tucker and this 'historian' hear about the other guy.

    Liberals and conservatives alike have turned on Tucker Carlson after controversial podcaster and self-proclaimed historian Darryl Cooper claimed on Carlson’s show that “millions of people ended up dead” in Nazi concentration camps.

    Cooper also painted U.K. prime minister Winston Churchill as the “chief villain” of World War II.

    Carlson said on X that Cooper “may be the best and most honest popular historian in the United States” when posting The Tucker Carlson Show Monday episode, which featured topics like Christianity and authoritarians like Viktor Orbán and Vladimir Putin.


    https://www.thedailybeast.com/tucker-carlson-slammed-after-hosting-nazi-apologist-on-podcast

    Some Yank historian called Darryl Cooper reckons "Winston Churchill is the chief villain of World War 2".

    He's going to shit his fucking pants when he reads up about the other guy.


    https://x.com/thesundaysport/status/1831223073611104393
    Nope. He's a Hitler stan apparently

    https://x.com/yashar/status/1831129276026134572
    A Hitler fan on Fucker Carlson's show?

    No, I refuse to believe that.
    I expect he is.

    I can see a case of depicting Winston Churchill as villain from the American isolationist perspective. It hinges on what date you consider the start of WW2:

    1937 for China and Japan
    1939 for Britain, Germany, France, Italy
    1941 for Russia and the USA

    Churchill made great efforts to involve America in the European War, and in pushing for a Germany first policy, rather than a Pacific war against Japan.

    The argument rather falls down as it was Hitler that declared war on the USA, not vice versa.
    Germany was the most dangerous enemy, so that made sense even if it was Japan that actually hit America first.
    Certainly from our perspective, less so from the American, and even less so from the Australian.

    The Pacific War had to wait more for logistic reasons. It takes a while to build all those ships
    I only found out recently that the Royal Navy took part in the Battle of Okinawa. In fact, by the end of the war, the British Pacific Fleet was immense. Over a million British, Empire and Commonwealth soldiers were set to invade Japan.
    I'd like to read more about it, it's been hardly written about.
    I’d also like to know how this country has gone from being the greatest empire on earth, with an “immense Pacific fleet” and a million men under arms in the Far East, to being so spineless and craven we cannot even defend the English Channel AND ALL WITHIN LIVING MEMORY

    It must be the greatest and fastest decline in human history?
    The Royal Navy, at its zenith was unable to stop small boats crossing the channel.

    Not just brandy and tobacco. Read up on the death-or-money boats.
    I think the England of 1600-1950 would have found a way to stop tens of thousands of fighting age young men, often quite hostile in outlook, from simply walking in to our country, via the beach, every year
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,521
    edited September 4
    Leon said:

    Sean_F said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Wait until Tucker and this 'historian' hear about the other guy.

    Liberals and conservatives alike have turned on Tucker Carlson after controversial podcaster and self-proclaimed historian Darryl Cooper claimed on Carlson’s show that “millions of people ended up dead” in Nazi concentration camps.

    Cooper also painted U.K. prime minister Winston Churchill as the “chief villain” of World War II.

    Carlson said on X that Cooper “may be the best and most honest popular historian in the United States” when posting The Tucker Carlson Show Monday episode, which featured topics like Christianity and authoritarians like Viktor Orbán and Vladimir Putin.


    https://www.thedailybeast.com/tucker-carlson-slammed-after-hosting-nazi-apologist-on-podcast

    Some Yank historian called Darryl Cooper reckons "Winston Churchill is the chief villain of World War 2".

    He's going to shit his fucking pants when he reads up about the other guy.


    https://x.com/thesundaysport/status/1831223073611104393
    Nope. He's a Hitler stan apparently

    https://x.com/yashar/status/1831129276026134572
    A Hitler fan on Fucker Carlson's show?

    No, I refuse to believe that.
    I expect he is.

    I can see a case of depicting Winston Churchill as villain from the American isolationist perspective. It hinges on what date you consider the start of WW2:

    1937 for China and Japan
    1939 for Britain, Germany, France, Italy
    1941 for Russia and the USA

    Churchill made great efforts to involve America in the European War, and in pushing for a Germany first policy, rather than a Pacific war against Japan.

    The argument rather falls down as it was Hitler that declared war on the USA, not vice versa.
    Germany was the most dangerous enemy, so that made sense even if it was Japan that actually hit America first.
    Certainly from our perspective, less so from the American, and even less so from the Australian.

    The Pacific War had to wait more for logistic reasons. It takes a while to build all those ships
    I only found out recently that the Royal Navy took part in the Battle of Okinawa. In fact, by the end of the war, the British Pacific Fleet was immense. Over a million British, Empire and Commonwealth soldiers were set to invade Japan.
    I'd like to read more about it, it's been hardly written about.
    I’d also like to know how this country has gone from being the greatest empire on earth, with an “immense Pacific fleet” and a million men under arms in the Far East, to being so spineless and craven we cannot even defend the English Channel AND ALL WITHIN LIVING MEMORY

    It must be the greatest and fastest decline in human history?
    We (ie most Western powers) learned the wrong lessons from WWII, namely that there is virtue in weakness and victimhood.
  • mwadamsmwadams Posts: 3,668
    Foxy said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Wait until Tucker and this 'historian' hear about the other guy.

    Liberals and conservatives alike have turned on Tucker Carlson after controversial podcaster and self-proclaimed historian Darryl Cooper claimed on Carlson’s show that “millions of people ended up dead” in Nazi concentration camps.

    Cooper also painted U.K. prime minister Winston Churchill as the “chief villain” of World War II.

    Carlson said on X that Cooper “may be the best and most honest popular historian in the United States” when posting The Tucker Carlson Show Monday episode, which featured topics like Christianity and authoritarians like Viktor Orbán and Vladimir Putin.


    https://www.thedailybeast.com/tucker-carlson-slammed-after-hosting-nazi-apologist-on-podcast

    Some Yank historian called Darryl Cooper reckons "Winston Churchill is the chief villain of World War 2".

    He's going to shit his fucking pants when he reads up about the other guy.


    https://x.com/thesundaysport/status/1831223073611104393
    Nope. He's a Hitler stan apparently

    https://x.com/yashar/status/1831129276026134572
    A Hitler fan on Fucker Carlson's show?

    No, I refuse to believe that.
    I expect he is.

    I can see a case of depicting Winston Churchill as villain from the American isolationist perspective. It hinges on what date you consider the start of WW2:

    1937 for China and Japan
    1939 for Britain, Germany, France, Italy
    1941 for Russia and the USA

    Churchill made great efforts to involve America in the European War, and in pushing for a Germany first policy, rather than a Pacific war against Japan.

    The argument rather falls down as it was Hitler that declared war on the USA, not vice versa.
    Depends whether a war needs to be declared or not for Russia. They invaded Poland on 17th September 1939.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,515

    eek said:

    FF43 said:

    FPT

    HYUFD said:

    'Kemi Badenoch called for rich pensioners to lose their winter fuel payments during her 2022 Tory leadership launch.

    Newly resurfaced clip shows she argued for means-testing. Notable given she’s criticised Labour for scrapping payments for all.'
    https://x.com/benrileysmith/status/1831079967586931063

    That seems to me to be a coherent position. And also one I agree with. Scrapping for all except those on benefits seems to me too extreme. But a proper system of means testing with a reasonable cut off does seem appropriate. It is something I would apply to all benefits including the 'middle class' ones like Child Benefit.
    I would scrap Winter Fuel Payment entirely on grounds of efficiency and if necessary adjust Pension Credit, which is the means by which older people with inadequate pensions get topped up. You might decide other poorer people, not just the old, struggle with fuel bills and adjust Universal Credit. This might not save any money compared with the status quo but it has the benefit of being a lot more equitable.

    In short Winter Fuel Payment is an indefensible benefit in its previous form and Reeves, Starmer and previously Badenoch were correct in wanting to change it. Perhaps they didn't handle the politics particularly well but they are right on the principle.

    ,.............

    And add, Badenoch is disingenuous in her claims that her means testing is different from Labour's means testing. Of course her attacks on Starmer and Reeves are entirely hypocritical and she's been found out.
    Not at all. She has suggested a proper system of means testing not just defaulting to the current unsuitable benefits threshhold. As I said on the previous page it is a coherent position and attacks like yours seem to be predicated on the simple pont that you don't like Badenoch rather than any proper examination of what she is saying. Your original comment copied from the previous thread is sensible. The random attack on Badenoch you have tacked on here is not.
    Isn't the problem then that a separate means test creates another layer of bureaucracy, swallowing up a decent slice of the savings?

    I guess the other question is where KB would draw the line. Wherever it goes, some people will be the wrong side of the cutoff.
    The easiest fix would be to claw it back by some means or other while paying it to everyone.

    But clawing it back via income tax (as is done with universal) would result in both pensioners being taxed so there really is no easy fix here - I think you end up with something like Martin Lewis suggested using council tax bands to pay it (and equally that would require combining 2 data sources to do so)
    Set the state pension rate at the rate of the tax-free allowance. Raise them both together. Any additional income is taxed. Problem solved.
    At the point you get to the tax free allowance do you abandon the triple lock, or make it a quadruple lock?
    Well that’s a political decision of the government of the day but the point is that if pension goes up, so does the tax free allowance, so everyone benefits.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,082

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Wait until Tucker and this 'historian' hear about the other guy.

    Liberals and conservatives alike have turned on Tucker Carlson after controversial podcaster and self-proclaimed historian Darryl Cooper claimed on Carlson’s show that “millions of people ended up dead” in Nazi concentration camps.

    Cooper also painted U.K. prime minister Winston Churchill as the “chief villain” of World War II.

    Carlson said on X that Cooper “may be the best and most honest popular historian in the United States” when posting The Tucker Carlson Show Monday episode, which featured topics like Christianity and authoritarians like Viktor Orbán and Vladimir Putin.


    https://www.thedailybeast.com/tucker-carlson-slammed-after-hosting-nazi-apologist-on-podcast

    Some Yank historian called Darryl Cooper reckons "Winston Churchill is the chief villain of World War 2".

    He's going to shit his fucking pants when he reads up about the other guy.


    https://x.com/thesundaysport/status/1831223073611104393
    Nope. He's a Hitler stan apparently

    https://x.com/yashar/status/1831129276026134572
    A Hitler fan on Fucker Carlson's show?

    No, I refuse to believe that.
    I expect he is.

    I can see a case of depicting Winston Churchill as villain from the American isolationist perspective. It hinges on what date you consider the start of WW2:

    1937 for China and Japan
    1939 for Britain, Germany, France, Italy
    1941 for Russia and the USA

    Churchill made great efforts to involve America in the European War, and in pushing for a Germany first policy, rather than a Pacific war against Japan.

    The argument rather falls down as it was Hitler that declared war on the USA, not vice versa.
    Germany was the most dangerous enemy, so that made sense even if it was Japan that actually hit America first.
    Certainly from our perspective, less so from the American, and even less so from the Australian.

    The Pacific War had to wait more for logistic reasons. It takes a while to build all those ships
    No, because Japan depended on oil for its fleet that could be, and was, easily cut-off and couldn't project much force thereafter, nor did it innovate much in technology.

    Germany was developing nuclear weapons, jet fighters, cutting-edge tanks and effectively projecting force with submarines - and could have gone further unchecked, particularly if the Soviets had been defeated.

    Germany was a bigger threat to the US.
    I’d say that the IJN was technologically superior to the German Navy.

    In terms of stuff that actually got used.

    Their aircraft carriers for instance. Though they did turn out to have glass jaws.
  • WildernessPt2WildernessPt2 Posts: 715
    edited September 4
    Leon said:

    HYUFD said:

    Badenoch is backed by Gove and was introduced by Francis Maude at her launch and also allegedly by Dougie Smith if you believe Nadine Dorries in her book who was also behind Sunak and part of Portillo's old team which switched to Cameron and Osborne.

    The winter fuel story might hit her a bit with members, if she fails to make the top two with Tory MPs today it will have hit her with them too

    Badenoch will, I fear, be a weak leader. She’s basically Davos woman but with an anti-woke agenda

    I like her but she is insubstantial and globalist, she is also too young. Perhaps with another decade she will be more interesting

    Out of a poor selection, probably Jenrick is the best, but I’m not overly hopeful

    Meanwhile Reform is mainly gammons and Farage is the only star, and he’s over 60

    It’s a damn shame as this Labour govt is risibly poor, already, and a good right wing opposition could mince them


    What about Cleverly? My other half who doesnt take much interest in politics (though a party member) likes him, she says he has a kind face.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,760
    Leon said:



    It must be the greatest and fastest decline in human history?

    Luton Town got relegated in three consecutive seasons from 2006-9.

    It's why Yaxley-Lennon is so fucking angry all the time.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,012
    A verbatim transcript from Trump's latest speech in Michigan. I think it starts with a criticism of Harris, hard to tell, but then?

    "She destroyed the city of San Francisco, it’s — and I own a big building there — it’s no — I shouldn’t talk about this but that’s OK I don’t give a damn because this is what I’m doing. I should say it’s the finest city in the world — sell and get the hell out of there, right? But I can’t do that. I don’t care, you know? I lost billions of dollars, billions of dollars. You know, somebody said, ‘What do you think you lost?’ I said, ‘Probably two, three billion. That’s OK, I don’t care.’ They say, ‘You think you’d do it again?’ And that’s the least of it. Nobody. They always say, I don’t know if you know. Lincoln was horribly treated. Uh, Jefferson was pretty horribly. Andrew Jackson they say was the worst of all, that he was treated worse than any other president. I said, ‘Do that study again, because I think there’s nobody close to Trump.’ I even got shot! And who the hell knows where that came from, right?"

    What the hell is he talking about?
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,515
    Also as an aside clawing back the tax free allowance above £100k is absolutely ridiculously needless complexity. Get rid of it.
  • Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Wait until Tucker and this 'historian' hear about the other guy.

    Liberals and conservatives alike have turned on Tucker Carlson after controversial podcaster and self-proclaimed historian Darryl Cooper claimed on Carlson’s show that “millions of people ended up dead” in Nazi concentration camps.

    Cooper also painted U.K. prime minister Winston Churchill as the “chief villain” of World War II.

    Carlson said on X that Cooper “may be the best and most honest popular historian in the United States” when posting The Tucker Carlson Show Monday episode, which featured topics like Christianity and authoritarians like Viktor Orbán and Vladimir Putin.


    https://www.thedailybeast.com/tucker-carlson-slammed-after-hosting-nazi-apologist-on-podcast

    Some Yank historian called Darryl Cooper reckons "Winston Churchill is the chief villain of World War 2".

    He's going to shit his fucking pants when he reads up about the other guy.


    https://x.com/thesundaysport/status/1831223073611104393
    Nope. He's a Hitler stan apparently

    https://x.com/yashar/status/1831129276026134572
    A Hitler fan on Fucker Carlson's show?

    No, I refuse to believe that.
    I expect he is.

    I can see a case of depicting Winston Churchill as villain from the American isolationist perspective. It hinges on what date you consider the start of WW2:

    1937 for China and Japan
    1939 for Britain, Germany, France, Italy
    1941 for Russia and the USA

    Churchill made great efforts to involve America in the European War, and in pushing for a Germany first policy, rather than a Pacific war against Japan.

    The argument rather falls down as it was Hitler that declared war on the USA, not vice versa.
    Germany was the most dangerous enemy, so that made sense even if it was Japan that actually hit America first.
    Certainly from our perspective, less so from the American, and even less so from the Australian.

    The Pacific War had to wait more for logistic reasons. It takes a while to build all those ships
    No, because Japan depended on oil for its fleet that could be, and was, easily cut-off and couldn't project much force thereafter, nor did it innovate much in technology.

    Germany was developing nuclear weapons, jet fighters, cutting-edge tanks and effectively projecting force with submarines - and could have gone further unchecked, particularly if the Soviets had been defeated.

    Germany was a bigger threat to the US.
    I’d say that the IJN was technologically superior to the German Navy.

    In terms of stuff that actually got used.

    Their aircraft carriers for instance. Though they did turn out to have glass jaws.
    To be fair, the Japanese walked into a massive elephant trap at Midway thanks to the US cracking Japan’s SIGINT
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,897
    Sean_F said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Wait until Tucker and this 'historian' hear about the other guy.

    Liberals and conservatives alike have turned on Tucker Carlson after controversial podcaster and self-proclaimed historian Darryl Cooper claimed on Carlson’s show that “millions of people ended up dead” in Nazi concentration camps.

    Cooper also painted U.K. prime minister Winston Churchill as the “chief villain” of World War II.

    Carlson said on X that Cooper “may be the best and most honest popular historian in the United States” when posting The Tucker Carlson Show Monday episode, which featured topics like Christianity and authoritarians like Viktor Orbán and Vladimir Putin.


    https://www.thedailybeast.com/tucker-carlson-slammed-after-hosting-nazi-apologist-on-podcast

    Some Yank historian called Darryl Cooper reckons "Winston Churchill is the chief villain of World War 2".

    He's going to shit his fucking pants when he reads up about the other guy.


    https://x.com/thesundaysport/status/1831223073611104393
    Nope. He's a Hitler stan apparently

    https://x.com/yashar/status/1831129276026134572
    A Hitler fan on Fucker Carlson's show?

    No, I refuse to believe that.
    I expect he is.

    I can see a case of depicting Winston Churchill as villain from the American isolationist perspective. It hinges on what date you consider the start of WW2:

    1937 for China and Japan
    1939 for Britain, Germany, France, Italy
    1941 for Russia and the USA

    Churchill made great efforts to involve America in the European War, and in pushing for a Germany first policy, rather than a Pacific war against Japan.

    The argument rather falls down as it was Hitler that declared war on the USA, not vice versa.
    Germany was the most dangerous enemy, so that made sense even if it was Japan that actually hit America first.
    Certainly from our perspective, less so from the American, and even less so from the Australian.

    The Pacific War had to wait more for logistic reasons. It takes a while to build all those ships
    I only found out recently that the Royal Navy took part in the Battle of Okinawa. In fact, by the end of the war, the British Pacific Fleet was immense. Over a million British, Empire and Commonwealth soldiers were set to invade Japan.
    My grandfather was one of them. He was grateful for the A-bomb.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496

    Leon said:

    HYUFD said:

    Badenoch is backed by Gove and was introduced by Francis Maude at her launch and also allegedly by Dougie Smith if you believe Nadine Dorries in her book who was also behind Sunak and part of Portillo's old team which switched to Cameron and Osborne.

    The winter fuel story might hit her a bit with members, if she fails to make the top two with Tory MPs today it will have hit her with them too

    Badenoch will, I fear, be a weak leader. She’s basically Davos woman but with an anti-woke agenda

    I like her but she is insubstantial and globalist, she is also too young. Perhaps with another decade she will be more interesting

    Out of a poor selection, probably Jenrick is the best, but I’m not overly hopeful

    Meanwhile Reform is mainly gammons and Farage is the only star, and he’s over 60

    It’s a damn shame as this Labour govt is risibly poor, already, and a good right wing opposition could mince them


    What about Cleverly? My other half who doesnt take much interest in politics (though a party member) likes him, she says he has a kind face.
    He’s OK but he’s very *continuity Sunak* and he’s rich and complacent

    The Tories need someone with FIRE. someone that hates the Left and the Wokeness, but also exudes charm and plausibility. There are such people elsewhere in the world, Britain seems unusually bereft. I imagine one will emerge in time, but it may be too late by then
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496

    Good morning, everyone.

    Mr. Leon, it isn't even the greatest decline in British history. When the Romans left, things collapsed. De-urbanisation, trade absolutely dislocated, loss of military capacity, coinage giving way to barter, political fragmentation, endemic warfare, collapsing living standards.

    That’s not even a comparison, that’s a category error
  • Also as an aside clawing back the tax free allowance above £100k is absolutely ridiculously needless complexity. Get rid of it.

    Could you imagine the headlines? Government cuts taxes for the higher tax payers whilst cutting wfa etc etc. The leaflets and press releases write themselves.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,521

    Sean_F said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Wait until Tucker and this 'historian' hear about the other guy.

    Liberals and conservatives alike have turned on Tucker Carlson after controversial podcaster and self-proclaimed historian Darryl Cooper claimed on Carlson’s show that “millions of people ended up dead” in Nazi concentration camps.

    Cooper also painted U.K. prime minister Winston Churchill as the “chief villain” of World War II.

    Carlson said on X that Cooper “may be the best and most honest popular historian in the United States” when posting The Tucker Carlson Show Monday episode, which featured topics like Christianity and authoritarians like Viktor Orbán and Vladimir Putin.


    https://www.thedailybeast.com/tucker-carlson-slammed-after-hosting-nazi-apologist-on-podcast

    Some Yank historian called Darryl Cooper reckons "Winston Churchill is the chief villain of World War 2".

    He's going to shit his fucking pants when he reads up about the other guy.


    https://x.com/thesundaysport/status/1831223073611104393
    Nope. He's a Hitler stan apparently

    https://x.com/yashar/status/1831129276026134572
    A Hitler fan on Fucker Carlson's show?

    No, I refuse to believe that.
    I expect he is.

    I can see a case of depicting Winston Churchill as villain from the American isolationist perspective. It hinges on what date you consider the start of WW2:

    1937 for China and Japan
    1939 for Britain, Germany, France, Italy
    1941 for Russia and the USA

    Churchill made great efforts to involve America in the European War, and in pushing for a Germany first policy, rather than a Pacific war against Japan.

    The argument rather falls down as it was Hitler that declared war on the USA, not vice versa.
    Germany was the most dangerous enemy, so that made sense even if it was Japan that actually hit America first.
    Certainly from our perspective, less so from the American, and even less so from the Australian.

    The Pacific War had to wait more for logistic reasons. It takes a while to build all those ships
    I only found out recently that the Royal Navy took part in the Battle of Okinawa. In fact, by the end of the war, the British Pacific Fleet was immense. Over a million British, Empire and Commonwealth soldiers were set to invade Japan.
    My grandfather was one of them. He was grateful for the A-bomb.
    These days, our leaders would wring their hands over the Japanese and send thousands to their deaths.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,515

    Also as an aside clawing back the tax free allowance above £100k is absolutely ridiculously needless complexity. Get rid of it.

    Could you imagine the headlines? Government cuts taxes for the higher tax payers whilst cutting wfa etc etc. The leaflets and press releases write themselves.
    Everyone needs to grow up
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,236

    I don't see what is wrong with Kemi's position, as a principle, it falls down only because it is technically very difficult as taxes are paid as an individual but WFA is per household, but stopping very wealthy from getting WFA is hardly an unconservative thing. Restricting it to £11,500 pension credit ceiling is pretty monstrous though.

    People on pension credit, which is twice the rate of universal credit, get the payments while younger people on UC don't. Do they not have problems affording their heating as well, on half the income?

    Point is, there are degrees of monstrosity and it comes down to where you draw the lines.
  • kamskikamski Posts: 5,208
    Sean_F said:

    Leon said:

    Sean_F said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Wait until Tucker and this 'historian' hear about the other guy.

    Liberals and conservatives alike have turned on Tucker Carlson after controversial podcaster and self-proclaimed historian Darryl Cooper claimed on Carlson’s show that “millions of people ended up dead” in Nazi concentration camps.

    Cooper also painted U.K. prime minister Winston Churchill as the “chief villain” of World War II.

    Carlson said on X that Cooper “may be the best and most honest popular historian in the United States” when posting The Tucker Carlson Show Monday episode, which featured topics like Christianity and authoritarians like Viktor Orbán and Vladimir Putin.


    https://www.thedailybeast.com/tucker-carlson-slammed-after-hosting-nazi-apologist-on-podcast

    Some Yank historian called Darryl Cooper reckons "Winston Churchill is the chief villain of World War 2".

    He's going to shit his fucking pants when he reads up about the other guy.


    https://x.com/thesundaysport/status/1831223073611104393
    Nope. He's a Hitler stan apparently

    https://x.com/yashar/status/1831129276026134572
    A Hitler fan on Fucker Carlson's show?

    No, I refuse to believe that.
    I expect he is.

    I can see a case of depicting Winston Churchill as villain from the American isolationist perspective. It hinges on what date you consider the start of WW2:

    1937 for China and Japan
    1939 for Britain, Germany, France, Italy
    1941 for Russia and the USA

    Churchill made great efforts to involve America in the European War, and in pushing for a Germany first policy, rather than a Pacific war against Japan.

    The argument rather falls down as it was Hitler that declared war on the USA, not vice versa.
    Germany was the most dangerous enemy, so that made sense even if it was Japan that actually hit America first.
    Certainly from our perspective, less so from the American, and even less so from the Australian.

    The Pacific War had to wait more for logistic reasons. It takes a while to build all those ships
    I only found out recently that the Royal Navy took part in the Battle of Okinawa. In fact, by the end of the war, the British Pacific Fleet was immense. Over a million British, Empire and Commonwealth soldiers were set to invade Japan.
    I'd like to read more about it, it's been hardly written about.
    I’d also like to know how this country has gone from being the greatest empire on earth, with an “immense Pacific fleet” and a million men under arms in the Far East, to being so spineless and craven we cannot even defend the English Channel AND ALL WITHIN LIVING MEMORY

    It must be the greatest and fastest decline in human history?
    We (ie most Western powers) learned the wrong lessons from WWII, namely that there is virtue in weakness and victimhood.
    That must be why countries like the US, UK and France didn't get involved in any foreign military operations in the decades after 1945
  • Dura_Ace said:

    Leon said:



    It must be the greatest and fastest decline in human history?

    Luton Town got relegated in three consecutive seasons from 2006-9.

    It's why Yaxley-Lennon is so fucking angry all the time.
    What is the obsession that people have with "Tommy Robinson is not his real name"? Is his name supposed to make him sound slightly foreign and thus a hypocrite? It all sounds a bit silly in the same way people referred to George Osborne as Gideon.
    Lots of people change their names, some for nefarious reasons, and some for their own reasons. "Michael Cain is not even his real name" insert Spongebob meme.
  • kamskikamski Posts: 5,208
    Leon said:

    Sean_F said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Wait until Tucker and this 'historian' hear about the other guy.

    Liberals and conservatives alike have turned on Tucker Carlson after controversial podcaster and self-proclaimed historian Darryl Cooper claimed on Carlson’s show that “millions of people ended up dead” in Nazi concentration camps.

    Cooper also painted U.K. prime minister Winston Churchill as the “chief villain” of World War II.

    Carlson said on X that Cooper “may be the best and most honest popular historian in the United States” when posting The Tucker Carlson Show Monday episode, which featured topics like Christianity and authoritarians like Viktor Orbán and Vladimir Putin.


    https://www.thedailybeast.com/tucker-carlson-slammed-after-hosting-nazi-apologist-on-podcast

    Some Yank historian called Darryl Cooper reckons "Winston Churchill is the chief villain of World War 2".

    He's going to shit his fucking pants when he reads up about the other guy.


    https://x.com/thesundaysport/status/1831223073611104393
    Nope. He's a Hitler stan apparently

    https://x.com/yashar/status/1831129276026134572
    A Hitler fan on Fucker Carlson's show?

    No, I refuse to believe that.
    I expect he is.

    I can see a case of depicting Winston Churchill as villain from the American isolationist perspective. It hinges on what date you consider the start of WW2:

    1937 for China and Japan
    1939 for Britain, Germany, France, Italy
    1941 for Russia and the USA

    Churchill made great efforts to involve America in the European War, and in pushing for a Germany first policy, rather than a Pacific war against Japan.

    The argument rather falls down as it was Hitler that declared war on the USA, not vice versa.
    Germany was the most dangerous enemy, so that made sense even if it was Japan that actually hit America first.
    Certainly from our perspective, less so from the American, and even less so from the Australian.

    The Pacific War had to wait more for logistic reasons. It takes a while to build all those ships
    I only found out recently that the Royal Navy took part in the Battle of Okinawa. In fact, by the end of the war, the British Pacific Fleet was immense. Over a million British, Empire and Commonwealth soldiers were set to invade Japan.
    I'd like to read more about it, it's been hardly written about.
    I’d also like to know how this country has gone from being the greatest empire on earth, with an “immense Pacific fleet” and a million men under arms in the Far East, to being so spineless and craven we cannot even defend the English Channel AND ALL WITHIN LIVING MEMORY

    It must be the greatest and fastest decline in human history?
    "Those were the days my friend..."
  • Also as an aside clawing back the tax free allowance above £100k is absolutely ridiculously needless complexity. Get rid of it.

    Could you imagine the headlines? Government cuts taxes for the higher tax payers whilst cutting wfa etc etc. The leaflets and press releases write themselves.
    Everyone needs to grow up
    There is no growing up when you are making appeals to the electorate.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496
    DavidL said:

    A verbatim transcript from Trump's latest speech in Michigan. I think it starts with a criticism of Harris, hard to tell, but then?

    "She destroyed the city of San Francisco, it’s — and I own a big building there — it’s no — I shouldn’t talk about this but that’s OK I don’t give a damn because this is what I’m doing. I should say it’s the finest city in the world — sell and get the hell out of there, right? But I can’t do that. I don’t care, you know? I lost billions of dollars, billions of dollars. You know, somebody said, ‘What do you think you lost?’ I said, ‘Probably two, three billion. That’s OK, I don’t care.’ They say, ‘You think you’d do it again?’ And that’s the least of it. Nobody. They always say, I don’t know if you know. Lincoln was horribly treated. Uh, Jefferson was pretty horribly. Andrew Jackson they say was the worst of all, that he was treated worse than any other president. I said, ‘Do that study again, because I think there’s nobody close to Trump.’ I even got shot! And who the hell knows where that came from, right?"

    What the hell is he talking about?

    it’s gibberish, clearly, but is it any worse than his usual drivel?

    He’s always done this stream of consciousness shtick, and sometimes he will suddenly be funny and sharp in the middle of it. Quite odd

    However he is 78 and a bit panicked and he recently nearly died of a bullet to the head, so some cognitive decline might be expected
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 23,143

    eek said:

    FF43 said:

    FPT

    HYUFD said:

    'Kemi Badenoch called for rich pensioners to lose their winter fuel payments during her 2022 Tory leadership launch.

    Newly resurfaced clip shows she argued for means-testing. Notable given she’s criticised Labour for scrapping payments for all.'
    https://x.com/benrileysmith/status/1831079967586931063

    That seems to me to be a coherent position. And also one I agree with. Scrapping for all except those on benefits seems to me too extreme. But a proper system of means testing with a reasonable cut off does seem appropriate. It is something I would apply to all benefits including the 'middle class' ones like Child Benefit.
    I would scrap Winter Fuel Payment entirely on grounds of efficiency and if necessary adjust Pension Credit, which is the means by which older people with inadequate pensions get topped up. You might decide other poorer people, not just the old, struggle with fuel bills and adjust Universal Credit. This might not save any money compared with the status quo but it has the benefit of being a lot more equitable.

    In short Winter Fuel Payment is an indefensible benefit in its previous form and Reeves, Starmer and previously Badenoch were correct in wanting to change it. Perhaps they didn't handle the politics particularly well but they are right on the principle.

    ,.............

    And add, Badenoch is disingenuous in her claims that her means testing is different from Labour's means testing. Of course her attacks on Starmer and Reeves are entirely hypocritical and she's been found out.
    Not at all. She has suggested a proper system of means testing not just defaulting to the current unsuitable benefits threshhold. As I said on the previous page it is a coherent position and attacks like yours seem to be predicated on the simple pont that you don't like Badenoch rather than any proper examination of what she is saying. Your original comment copied from the previous thread is sensible. The random attack on Badenoch you have tacked on here is not.
    Isn't the problem then that a separate means test creates another layer of bureaucracy, swallowing up a decent slice of the savings?

    I guess the other question is where KB would draw the line. Wherever it goes, some people will be the wrong side of the cutoff.
    The easiest fix would be to claw it back by some means or other while paying it to everyone.

    But clawing it back via income tax (as is done with universal) would result in both pensioners being taxed so there really is no easy fix here - I think you end up with something like Martin Lewis suggested using council tax bands to pay it (and equally that would require combining 2 data sources to do so)
    Set the state pension rate at the rate of the tax-free allowance. Raise them both together. Any additional income is taxed. Problem solved.
    At the point you get to the tax free allowance do you abandon the triple lock, or make it a quadruple lock?
    The quadrupule lock is the only solution to the triple lock. Just change the 4 locks to be worth less than the current 3 locks and that can get lost in complexity whilst 4 >3 is the message.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,012
    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    A verbatim transcript from Trump's latest speech in Michigan. I think it starts with a criticism of Harris, hard to tell, but then?

    "She destroyed the city of San Francisco, it’s — and I own a big building there — it’s no — I shouldn’t talk about this but that’s OK I don’t give a damn because this is what I’m doing. I should say it’s the finest city in the world — sell and get the hell out of there, right? But I can’t do that. I don’t care, you know? I lost billions of dollars, billions of dollars. You know, somebody said, ‘What do you think you lost?’ I said, ‘Probably two, three billion. That’s OK, I don’t care.’ They say, ‘You think you’d do it again?’ And that’s the least of it. Nobody. They always say, I don’t know if you know. Lincoln was horribly treated. Uh, Jefferson was pretty horribly. Andrew Jackson they say was the worst of all, that he was treated worse than any other president. I said, ‘Do that study again, because I think there’s nobody close to Trump.’ I even got shot! And who the hell knows where that came from, right?"

    What the hell is he talking about?

    it’s gibberish, clearly, but is it any worse than his usual drivel?

    He’s always done this stream of consciousness shtick, and sometimes he will suddenly be funny and sharp in the middle of it. Quite odd

    However he is 78 and a bit panicked and he recently nearly died of a bullet to the head, so some cognitive decline might be expected
    Some?
  • kamskikamski Posts: 5,208

    Dura_Ace said:

    Leon said:



    It must be the greatest and fastest decline in human history?

    Luton Town got relegated in three consecutive seasons from 2006-9.

    It's why Yaxley-Lennon is so fucking angry all the time.
    What is the obsession that people have with "Tommy Robinson is not his real name"? Is his name supposed to make him sound slightly foreign and thus a hypocrite? It all sounds a bit silly in the same way people referred to George Osborne as Gideon.
    Lots of people change their names, some for nefarious reasons, and some for their own reasons. "Michael Cain is not even his real name" insert Spongebob meme.
    Yaxley-Lennon is funnier and more distinctive than Robinson. If it upsets Yaxley-Lennon, sorry, Robinson fans it's also OK.

    Didn't know that about Michael Caine - thanks!
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496
    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    A verbatim transcript from Trump's latest speech in Michigan. I think it starts with a criticism of Harris, hard to tell, but then?

    "She destroyed the city of San Francisco, it’s — and I own a big building there — it’s no — I shouldn’t talk about this but that’s OK I don’t give a damn because this is what I’m doing. I should say it’s the finest city in the world — sell and get the hell out of there, right? But I can’t do that. I don’t care, you know? I lost billions of dollars, billions of dollars. You know, somebody said, ‘What do you think you lost?’ I said, ‘Probably two, three billion. That’s OK, I don’t care.’ They say, ‘You think you’d do it again?’ And that’s the least of it. Nobody. They always say, I don’t know if you know. Lincoln was horribly treated. Uh, Jefferson was pretty horribly. Andrew Jackson they say was the worst of all, that he was treated worse than any other president. I said, ‘Do that study again, because I think there’s nobody close to Trump.’ I even got shot! And who the hell knows where that came from, right?"

    What the hell is he talking about?

    it’s gibberish, clearly, but is it any worse than his usual drivel?

    He’s always done this stream of consciousness shtick, and sometimes he will suddenly be funny and sharp in the middle of it. Quite odd

    However he is 78 and a bit panicked and he recently nearly died of a bullet to the head, so some cognitive decline might be expected
    Some?
    Nikki Haley must be feeling vindicated but very annoyed

    “The first party to ditch its 80 year old candidate will win”

    And so it is. The Democrats
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,945
    "Sir Tony Blair admits influx of migrants under his premiership placed ‘strain’ on communities"

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/09/04/sir-tony-blair-migrants-premiership-communities/
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,173

    Good morning, everyone.

    Mr. Leon, it isn't even the greatest decline in British history. When the Romans left, things collapsed. De-urbanisation, trade absolutely dislocated, loss of military capacity, coinage giving way to barter, political fragmentation, endemic warfare, collapsing living standards.

    Give it another few years...
  • DriverDriver Posts: 4,974

    Also as an aside clawing back the tax free allowance above £100k is absolutely ridiculously needless complexity. Get rid of it.

    Could you imagine the headlines? Government cuts taxes for the higher tax payers whilst cutting wfa etc etc. The leaflets and press releases write themselves.
    Everyone needs to grow up
    There is no growing up when you are making appeals to the electorate.
    The problem is that the electorate needs to grow up...
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,435
    mwadams said:

    Foxy said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Wait until Tucker and this 'historian' hear about the other guy.

    Liberals and conservatives alike have turned on Tucker Carlson after controversial podcaster and self-proclaimed historian Darryl Cooper claimed on Carlson’s show that “millions of people ended up dead” in Nazi concentration camps.

    Cooper also painted U.K. prime minister Winston Churchill as the “chief villain” of World War II.

    Carlson said on X that Cooper “may be the best and most honest popular historian in the United States” when posting The Tucker Carlson Show Monday episode, which featured topics like Christianity and authoritarians like Viktor Orbán and Vladimir Putin.


    https://www.thedailybeast.com/tucker-carlson-slammed-after-hosting-nazi-apologist-on-podcast

    Some Yank historian called Darryl Cooper reckons "Winston Churchill is the chief villain of World War 2".

    He's going to shit his fucking pants when he reads up about the other guy.


    https://x.com/thesundaysport/status/1831223073611104393
    Nope. He's a Hitler stan apparently

    https://x.com/yashar/status/1831129276026134572
    A Hitler fan on Fucker Carlson's show?

    No, I refuse to believe that.
    I expect he is.

    I can see a case of depicting Winston Churchill as villain from the American isolationist perspective. It hinges on what date you consider the start of WW2:

    1937 for China and Japan
    1939 for Britain, Germany, France, Italy
    1941 for Russia and the USA

    Churchill made great efforts to involve America in the European War, and in pushing for a Germany first policy, rather than a Pacific war against Japan.

    The argument rather falls down as it was Hitler that declared war on the USA, not vice versa.
    Depends whether a war needs to be declared or not for Russia. They invaded Poland on 17th September 1939.
    'The second world war started with Barabarossa' is a leftist piece of b/s beloved by Russians and their supporters. As you say, Russia's involvement with the war started in 1939 with their Polish invasion. Something, apparently, Russians don't like to talk about much - as they were working with the fascists they now hate.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,082
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Sean_F said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Wait until Tucker and this 'historian' hear about the other guy.

    Liberals and conservatives alike have turned on Tucker Carlson after controversial podcaster and self-proclaimed historian Darryl Cooper claimed on Carlson’s show that “millions of people ended up dead” in Nazi concentration camps.

    Cooper also painted U.K. prime minister Winston Churchill as the “chief villain” of World War II.

    Carlson said on X that Cooper “may be the best and most honest popular historian in the United States” when posting The Tucker Carlson Show Monday episode, which featured topics like Christianity and authoritarians like Viktor Orbán and Vladimir Putin.


    https://www.thedailybeast.com/tucker-carlson-slammed-after-hosting-nazi-apologist-on-podcast

    Some Yank historian called Darryl Cooper reckons "Winston Churchill is the chief villain of World War 2".

    He's going to shit his fucking pants when he reads up about the other guy.


    https://x.com/thesundaysport/status/1831223073611104393
    Nope. He's a Hitler stan apparently

    https://x.com/yashar/status/1831129276026134572
    A Hitler fan on Fucker Carlson's show?

    No, I refuse to believe that.
    I expect he is.

    I can see a case of depicting Winston Churchill as villain from the American isolationist perspective. It hinges on what date you consider the start of WW2:

    1937 for China and Japan
    1939 for Britain, Germany, France, Italy
    1941 for Russia and the USA

    Churchill made great efforts to involve America in the European War, and in pushing for a Germany first policy, rather than a Pacific war against Japan.

    The argument rather falls down as it was Hitler that declared war on the USA, not vice versa.
    Germany was the most dangerous enemy, so that made sense even if it was Japan that actually hit America first.
    Certainly from our perspective, less so from the American, and even less so from the Australian.

    The Pacific War had to wait more for logistic reasons. It takes a while to build all those ships
    I only found out recently that the Royal Navy took part in the Battle of Okinawa. In fact, by the end of the war, the British Pacific Fleet was immense. Over a million British, Empire and Commonwealth soldiers were set to invade Japan.
    I'd like to read more about it, it's been hardly written about.
    I’d also like to know how this country has gone from being the greatest empire on earth, with an “immense Pacific fleet” and a million men under arms in the Far East, to being so spineless and craven we cannot even defend the English Channel AND ALL WITHIN LIVING MEMORY

    It must be the greatest and fastest decline in human history?
    The Royal Navy, at its zenith was unable to stop small boats crossing the channel.

    Not just brandy and tobacco. Read up on the death-or-money boats.
    I think the England of 1600-1950 would have found a way to stop tens of thousands of fighting age young men, often quite hostile in outlook, from simply walking in to our country, via the beach, every year
    If you are ok with killing them, then stopping them is trivial.

    A single helicopter with a light cannon could destroy all of them. To keep one on station, you’d need a total of 4, probably. One in maintenance, one getting ready, one in transit, one on station.

    You’d just leave the survivors to drown. No need to go all Imperial Japanese Navy and murder them.

    There is a slight flaw in the above. I wonder if you spot what that is?
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,141

    Dura_Ace said:

    Leon said:



    It must be the greatest and fastest decline in human history?

    Luton Town got relegated in three consecutive seasons from 2006-9.

    It's why Yaxley-Lennon is so fucking angry all the time.
    What is the obsession that people have with "Tommy Robinson is not his real name"? Is his name supposed to make him sound slightly foreign and thus a hypocrite? It all sounds a bit silly in the same way people referred to George Osborne as Gideon.
    Lots of people change their names, some for nefarious reasons, and some for their own reasons. "Michael Cain is not even his real name" insert Spongebob meme.
    There's a difference between your preferred version of your name and adopting a completely new moniker. Dunno if the artist formely known as Yaxley-Lennon has even gone down the deed poll route; given that he's also used Andrew McMaster, Paul Harris & Wayne King*, possibly not.

    *I suspect this is an example of the lesser spotted far right sense of humour.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Sean_F said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Wait until Tucker and this 'historian' hear about the other guy.

    Liberals and conservatives alike have turned on Tucker Carlson after controversial podcaster and self-proclaimed historian Darryl Cooper claimed on Carlson’s show that “millions of people ended up dead” in Nazi concentration camps.

    Cooper also painted U.K. prime minister Winston Churchill as the “chief villain” of World War II.

    Carlson said on X that Cooper “may be the best and most honest popular historian in the United States” when posting The Tucker Carlson Show Monday episode, which featured topics like Christianity and authoritarians like Viktor Orbán and Vladimir Putin.


    https://www.thedailybeast.com/tucker-carlson-slammed-after-hosting-nazi-apologist-on-podcast

    Some Yank historian called Darryl Cooper reckons "Winston Churchill is the chief villain of World War 2".

    He's going to shit his fucking pants when he reads up about the other guy.


    https://x.com/thesundaysport/status/1831223073611104393
    Nope. He's a Hitler stan apparently

    https://x.com/yashar/status/1831129276026134572
    A Hitler fan on Fucker Carlson's show?

    No, I refuse to believe that.
    I expect he is.

    I can see a case of depicting Winston Churchill as villain from the American isolationist perspective. It hinges on what date you consider the start of WW2:

    1937 for China and Japan
    1939 for Britain, Germany, France, Italy
    1941 for Russia and the USA

    Churchill made great efforts to involve America in the European War, and in pushing for a Germany first policy, rather than a Pacific war against Japan.

    The argument rather falls down as it was Hitler that declared war on the USA, not vice versa.
    Germany was the most dangerous enemy, so that made sense even if it was Japan that actually hit America first.
    Certainly from our perspective, less so from the American, and even less so from the Australian.

    The Pacific War had to wait more for logistic reasons. It takes a while to build all those ships
    I only found out recently that the Royal Navy took part in the Battle of Okinawa. In fact, by the end of the war, the British Pacific Fleet was immense. Over a million British, Empire and Commonwealth soldiers were set to invade Japan.
    I'd like to read more about it, it's been hardly written about.
    I’d also like to know how this country has gone from being the greatest empire on earth, with an “immense Pacific fleet” and a million men under arms in the Far East, to being so spineless and craven we cannot even defend the English Channel AND ALL WITHIN LIVING MEMORY

    It must be the greatest and fastest decline in human history?
    The Royal Navy, at its zenith was unable to stop small boats crossing the channel.

    Not just brandy and tobacco. Read up on the death-or-money boats.
    I think the England of 1600-1950 would have found a way to stop tens of thousands of fighting age young men, often quite hostile in outlook, from simply walking in to our country, via the beach, every year
    If you are ok with killing them, then stopping them is trivial.

    A single helicopter with a light cannon could destroy all of them. To keep one on station, you’d need a total of 4, probably. One in maintenance, one getting ready, one in transit, one on station.

    You’d just leave the survivors to drown. No need to go all Imperial Japanese Navy and murder them.

    There is a slight flaw in the above. I wonder if you spot what that is?
    You’re still putting full stops at the end of sentences?
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,082

    Dura_Ace said:

    Leon said:



    It must be the greatest and fastest decline in human history?

    Luton Town got relegated in three consecutive seasons from 2006-9.

    It's why Yaxley-Lennon is so fucking angry all the time.
    What is the obsession that people have with "Tommy Robinson is not his real name"? Is his name supposed to make him sound slightly foreign and thus a hypocrite? It all sounds a bit silly in the same way people referred to George Osborne as Gideon.
    Lots of people change their names, some for nefarious reasons, and some for their own reasons. "Michael Cain is not even his real name" insert Spongebob meme.
    Tommy changed his name as part of his performance as Der Fuhrer.

    Using his original name upsets him. Given that he is a nasty piece of shit, upsetting him is fine with me.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,521

    mwadams said:

    Foxy said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Wait until Tucker and this 'historian' hear about the other guy.

    Liberals and conservatives alike have turned on Tucker Carlson after controversial podcaster and self-proclaimed historian Darryl Cooper claimed on Carlson’s show that “millions of people ended up dead” in Nazi concentration camps.

    Cooper also painted U.K. prime minister Winston Churchill as the “chief villain” of World War II.

    Carlson said on X that Cooper “may be the best and most honest popular historian in the United States” when posting The Tucker Carlson Show Monday episode, which featured topics like Christianity and authoritarians like Viktor Orbán and Vladimir Putin.


    https://www.thedailybeast.com/tucker-carlson-slammed-after-hosting-nazi-apologist-on-podcast

    Some Yank historian called Darryl Cooper reckons "Winston Churchill is the chief villain of World War 2".

    He's going to shit his fucking pants when he reads up about the other guy.


    https://x.com/thesundaysport/status/1831223073611104393
    Nope. He's a Hitler stan apparently

    https://x.com/yashar/status/1831129276026134572
    A Hitler fan on Fucker Carlson's show?

    No, I refuse to believe that.
    I expect he is.

    I can see a case of depicting Winston Churchill as villain from the American isolationist perspective. It hinges on what date you consider the start of WW2:

    1937 for China and Japan
    1939 for Britain, Germany, France, Italy
    1941 for Russia and the USA

    Churchill made great efforts to involve America in the European War, and in pushing for a Germany first policy, rather than a Pacific war against Japan.

    The argument rather falls down as it was Hitler that declared war on the USA, not vice versa.
    Depends whether a war needs to be declared or not for Russia. They invaded Poland on 17th September 1939.
    'The second world war started with Barabarossa' is a leftist piece of b/s beloved by Russians and their supporters. As you say, Russia's involvement with the war started in 1939 with their Polish invasion. Something, apparently, Russians don't like to talk about much - as they were working with the fascists they now hate.
    I think their line of argument is that they were liberating Eastern Poland and the Baltic States.
  • kamskikamski Posts: 5,208
    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    A verbatim transcript from Trump's latest speech in Michigan. I think it starts with a criticism of Harris, hard to tell, but then?

    "She destroyed the city of San Francisco, it’s — and I own a big building there — it’s no — I shouldn’t talk about this but that’s OK I don’t give a damn because this is what I’m doing. I should say it’s the finest city in the world — sell and get the hell out of there, right? But I can’t do that. I don’t care, you know? I lost billions of dollars, billions of dollars. You know, somebody said, ‘What do you think you lost?’ I said, ‘Probably two, three billion. That’s OK, I don’t care.’ They say, ‘You think you’d do it again?’ And that’s the least of it. Nobody. They always say, I don’t know if you know. Lincoln was horribly treated. Uh, Jefferson was pretty horribly. Andrew Jackson they say was the worst of all, that he was treated worse than any other president. I said, ‘Do that study again, because I think there’s nobody close to Trump.’ I even got shot! And who the hell knows where that came from, right?"

    What the hell is he talking about?

    it’s gibberish, clearly, but is it any worse than his usual drivel?

    He’s always done this stream of consciousness shtick, and sometimes he will suddenly be funny and sharp in the middle of it. Quite odd

    However he is 78 and a bit panicked and he recently nearly died of a bullet to the head, so some cognitive decline might be expected
    I listened to a whole unedited speech of Trump in 2016, and it was rambling drivel then. Like Grampa Simpson but less coherent and with a lot more bigotry and self-aggrandisement. The fake media would take one or 2 clips out of it that seemed to make most sense and give a false impression that the guy wasn't off his trolley.

    That was 8 years ago, and I'm not prepared to go through that again, so can't say if he's got worse.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 11,932
    edited September 4
    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    A verbatim transcript from Trump's latest speech in Michigan. I think it starts with a criticism of Harris, hard to tell, but then?

    "She destroyed the city of San Francisco, it’s — and I own a big building there — it’s no — I shouldn’t talk about this but that’s OK I don’t give a damn because this is what I’m doing. I should say it’s the finest city in the world — sell and get the hell out of there, right? But I can’t do that. I don’t care, you know? I lost billions of dollars, billions of dollars. You know, somebody said, ‘What do you think you lost?’ I said, ‘Probably two, three billion. That’s OK, I don’t care.’ They say, ‘You think you’d do it again?’ And that’s the least of it. Nobody. They always say, I don’t know if you know. Lincoln was horribly treated. Uh, Jefferson was pretty horribly. Andrew Jackson they say was the worst of all, that he was treated worse than any other president. I said, ‘Do that study again, because I think there’s nobody close to Trump.’ I even got shot! And who the hell knows where that came from, right?"

    What the hell is he talking about?

    it’s gibberish, clearly, but is it any worse than his usual drivel?

    He’s always done this stream of consciousness shtick, and sometimes he will suddenly be funny and sharp in the middle of it. Quite odd

    However he is 78 and a bit panicked and he recently nearly died of a bullet to the head, so some cognitive decline might be expected
    Some?
    There is a bit recently where he says people criticise me for being all over the place, but then it all comes together (he wishes) and English professors say I am brilliant. The best.

    PS He calls it the weave
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 63,114
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Sean_F said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Wait until Tucker and this 'historian' hear about the other guy.

    Liberals and conservatives alike have turned on Tucker Carlson after controversial podcaster and self-proclaimed historian Darryl Cooper claimed on Carlson’s show that “millions of people ended up dead” in Nazi concentration camps.

    Cooper also painted U.K. prime minister Winston Churchill as the “chief villain” of World War II.

    Carlson said on X that Cooper “may be the best and most honest popular historian in the United States” when posting The Tucker Carlson Show Monday episode, which featured topics like Christianity and authoritarians like Viktor Orbán and Vladimir Putin.


    https://www.thedailybeast.com/tucker-carlson-slammed-after-hosting-nazi-apologist-on-podcast

    Some Yank historian called Darryl Cooper reckons "Winston Churchill is the chief villain of World War 2".

    He's going to shit his fucking pants when he reads up about the other guy.


    https://x.com/thesundaysport/status/1831223073611104393
    Nope. He's a Hitler stan apparently

    https://x.com/yashar/status/1831129276026134572
    A Hitler fan on Fucker Carlson's show?

    No, I refuse to believe that.
    I expect he is.

    I can see a case of depicting Winston Churchill as villain from the American isolationist perspective. It hinges on what date you consider the start of WW2:

    1937 for China and Japan
    1939 for Britain, Germany, France, Italy
    1941 for Russia and the USA

    Churchill made great efforts to involve America in the European War, and in pushing for a Germany first policy, rather than a Pacific war against Japan.

    The argument rather falls down as it was Hitler that declared war on the USA, not vice versa.
    Germany was the most dangerous enemy, so that made sense even if it was Japan that actually hit America first.
    Certainly from our perspective, less so from the American, and even less so from the Australian.

    The Pacific War had to wait more for logistic reasons. It takes a while to build all those ships
    I only found out recently that the Royal Navy took part in the Battle of Okinawa. In fact, by the end of the war, the British Pacific Fleet was immense. Over a million British, Empire and Commonwealth soldiers were set to invade Japan.
    I'd like to read more about it, it's been hardly written about.
    I’d also like to know how this country has gone from being the greatest empire on earth, with an “immense Pacific fleet” and a million men under arms in the Far East, to being so spineless and craven we cannot even defend the English Channel AND ALL WITHIN LIVING MEMORY

    It must be the greatest and fastest decline in human history?
    The Royal Navy, at its zenith was unable to stop small boats crossing the channel.

    Not just brandy and tobacco. Read up on the death-or-money boats.
    I think the England of 1600-1950 would have found a way to stop tens of thousands of fighting age young men, often quite hostile in outlook, from simply walking in to our country, via the beach, every year
    18th century smuggling gangs say 'hi'.
  • Dura_Ace said:

    Leon said:



    It must be the greatest and fastest decline in human history?

    Luton Town got relegated in three consecutive seasons from 2006-9.

    It's why Yaxley-Lennon is so fucking angry all the time.
    What is the obsession that people have with "Tommy Robinson is not his real name"? Is his name supposed to make him sound slightly foreign and thus a hypocrite? It all sounds a bit silly in the same way people referred to George Osborne as Gideon.
    Lots of people change their names, some for nefarious reasons, and some for their own reasons. "Michael Cain is not even his real name" insert Spongebob meme.
    Tommy changed his name as part of his performance as Der Fuhrer.

    Using his original name upsets him. Given that he is a nasty piece of shit, upsetting him is fine with me.
    It's done as if it is some big 'own' on him, but I'm not sure it is. It just makes the person doing it sound childish. It doesnt detract from his following.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496
    kamski said:

    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    A verbatim transcript from Trump's latest speech in Michigan. I think it starts with a criticism of Harris, hard to tell, but then?

    "She destroyed the city of San Francisco, it’s — and I own a big building there — it’s no — I shouldn’t talk about this but that’s OK I don’t give a damn because this is what I’m doing. I should say it’s the finest city in the world — sell and get the hell out of there, right? But I can’t do that. I don’t care, you know? I lost billions of dollars, billions of dollars. You know, somebody said, ‘What do you think you lost?’ I said, ‘Probably two, three billion. That’s OK, I don’t care.’ They say, ‘You think you’d do it again?’ And that’s the least of it. Nobody. They always say, I don’t know if you know. Lincoln was horribly treated. Uh, Jefferson was pretty horribly. Andrew Jackson they say was the worst of all, that he was treated worse than any other president. I said, ‘Do that study again, because I think there’s nobody close to Trump.’ I even got shot! And who the hell knows where that came from, right?"

    What the hell is he talking about?

    it’s gibberish, clearly, but is it any worse than his usual drivel?

    He’s always done this stream of consciousness shtick, and sometimes he will suddenly be funny and sharp in the middle of it. Quite odd

    However he is 78 and a bit panicked and he recently nearly died of a bullet to the head, so some cognitive decline might be expected
    I listened to a whole unedited speech of Trump in 2016, and it was rambling drivel then. Like Grampa Simpson but less coherent and with a lot more bigotry and self-aggrandisement. The fake media would take one or 2 clips out of it that seemed to make most sense and give a false impression that the guy wasn't off his trolley.

    That was 8 years ago, and I'm not prepared to go through that again, so can't say if he's got worse.
    I sense that the “sharp, funny” moments are decreasing in number and the long rambling sections are getting longer. I also think the sassytempt really fucked with his mind. As it would anyone’s, but his mind was already *quirky*
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,082

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Wait until Tucker and this 'historian' hear about the other guy.

    Liberals and conservatives alike have turned on Tucker Carlson after controversial podcaster and self-proclaimed historian Darryl Cooper claimed on Carlson’s show that “millions of people ended up dead” in Nazi concentration camps.

    Cooper also painted U.K. prime minister Winston Churchill as the “chief villain” of World War II.

    Carlson said on X that Cooper “may be the best and most honest popular historian in the United States” when posting The Tucker Carlson Show Monday episode, which featured topics like Christianity and authoritarians like Viktor Orbán and Vladimir Putin.


    https://www.thedailybeast.com/tucker-carlson-slammed-after-hosting-nazi-apologist-on-podcast

    Some Yank historian called Darryl Cooper reckons "Winston Churchill is the chief villain of World War 2".

    He's going to shit his fucking pants when he reads up about the other guy.


    https://x.com/thesundaysport/status/1831223073611104393
    Nope. He's a Hitler stan apparently

    https://x.com/yashar/status/1831129276026134572
    A Hitler fan on Fucker Carlson's show?

    No, I refuse to believe that.
    I expect he is.

    I can see a case of depicting Winston Churchill as villain from the American isolationist perspective. It hinges on what date you consider the start of WW2:

    1937 for China and Japan
    1939 for Britain, Germany, France, Italy
    1941 for Russia and the USA

    Churchill made great efforts to involve America in the European War, and in pushing for a Germany first policy, rather than a Pacific war against Japan.

    The argument rather falls down as it was Hitler that declared war on the USA, not vice versa.
    Germany was the most dangerous enemy, so that made sense even if it was Japan that actually hit America first.
    Certainly from our perspective, less so from the American, and even less so from the Australian.

    The Pacific War had to wait more for logistic reasons. It takes a while to build all those ships
    No, because Japan depended on oil for its fleet that could be, and was, easily cut-off and couldn't project much force thereafter, nor did it innovate much in technology.

    Germany was developing nuclear weapons, jet fighters, cutting-edge tanks and effectively projecting force with submarines - and could have gone further unchecked, particularly if the Soviets had been defeated.

    Germany was a bigger threat to the US.
    I’d say that the IJN was technologically superior to the German Navy.

    In terms of stuff that actually got used.

    Their aircraft carriers for instance. Though they did turn out to have glass jaws.
    To be fair, the Japanese walked into a massive elephant trap at Midway thanks to the US cracking Japan’s SIGINT
    If the Japanese had managed to sink the entire US Navy, within 18 months, the US navy would have been bigger than the IJN.

    The relative construction rates were that absurd. The US started cancelling ships, because while they could have afforded and manned them, there was no need for them. The submarines ran out of targets, for example, and most spent 1945 picking up downed pilots…

    There was no way Japan could have won.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,405

    eek said:

    FF43 said:

    FPT

    HYUFD said:

    'Kemi Badenoch called for rich pensioners to lose their winter fuel payments during her 2022 Tory leadership launch.

    Newly resurfaced clip shows she argued for means-testing. Notable given she’s criticised Labour for scrapping payments for all.'
    https://x.com/benrileysmith/status/1831079967586931063

    That seems to me to be a coherent position. And also one I agree with. Scrapping for all except those on benefits seems to me too extreme. But a proper system of means testing with a reasonable cut off does seem appropriate. It is something I would apply to all benefits including the 'middle class' ones like Child Benefit.
    I would scrap Winter Fuel Payment entirely on grounds of efficiency and if necessary adjust Pension Credit, which is the means by which older people with inadequate pensions get topped up. You might decide other poorer people, not just the old, struggle with fuel bills and adjust Universal Credit. This might not save any money compared with the status quo but it has the benefit of being a lot more equitable.

    In short Winter Fuel Payment is an indefensible benefit in its previous form and Reeves, Starmer and previously Badenoch were correct in wanting to change it. Perhaps they didn't handle the politics particularly well but they are right on the principle.

    ,.............

    And add, Badenoch is disingenuous in her claims that her means testing is different from Labour's means testing. Of course her attacks on Starmer and Reeves are entirely hypocritical and she's been found out.
    Not at all. She has suggested a proper system of means testing not just defaulting to the current unsuitable benefits threshhold. As I said on the previous page it is a coherent position and attacks like yours seem to be predicated on the simple pont that you don't like Badenoch rather than any proper examination of what she is saying. Your original comment copied from the previous thread is sensible. The random attack on Badenoch you have tacked on here is not.
    Isn't the problem then that a separate means test creates another layer of bureaucracy, swallowing up a decent slice of the savings?

    I guess the other question is where KB would draw the line. Wherever it goes, some people will be the wrong side of the cutoff.
    The easiest fix would be to claw it back by some means or other while paying it to everyone.

    But clawing it back via income tax (as is done with universal) would result in both pensioners being taxed so there really is no easy fix here - I think you end up with something like Martin Lewis suggested using council tax bands to pay it (and equally that would require combining 2 data sources to do so)
    Set the state pension rate at the rate of the tax-free allowance. Raise them both together. Any additional income is taxed. Problem solved.
    At the point you get to the tax free allowance do you abandon the triple lock, or make it a quadruple lock?
    The quadrupule lock is the only solution to the triple lock. Just change the 4 locks to be worth less than the current 3 locks and that can get lost in complexity whilst 4 >3 is the message.
    Changing the system to a triple lock rather than a triple ratchet would help.
This discussion has been closed.